Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] add canonical address checks to HVM

[Keir Fraser <keir@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 1/12/06 08:20, "Jan Beulich" <jbeulich@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>> We should be defensive about guest reads/writes/MSR-accesses anyway. I.e.,
>> we should at least accept faults on those accesses, and make sure the worst
>> that happens is a domain crash.
> 
> That I take for granted. But it's far from optimal. I don't know about modern
> Windows (has been too long since I was last looking at their handling of
> this),
> but at least Linux takes precautions when doing potentially dangerous
> accesses in so many places that it would seem unreasonable to crash a
> domain when it could be passed a simple fault at the right point, and let it
> decide for itself whether it wants to die.

Linux would never be barking mad enough to poke a non-canonical address in
64-bit mode, I'm sure. :-)  But yes, I will take a closer look at the
patch...

 -- Keir


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel