Re: [win-pv-devel] [PATCH] Add a user mode library wrapper for XENIFACE IOCTLs

[Marek Marczykowski-Górecki <marmarek@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 03:16:44PM +0000, Owen Smith wrote:
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: win-pv-devel [mailto:win-pv-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
> > Behalf Of Marek Marczykowski-Górecki
> > Sent: 09 July 2018 11:22
> > To: win-pv-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Cc: Rafal Wojdyla <omeg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Marek Marczykowski-
> > Górecki <marmarek@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Subject: [win-pv-devel] [PATCH] Add a user mode library wrapper for XENIFACE
> > IOCTLs
> > 
> > From: Rafal Wojdyla <omeg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Rafal Wojdyla <omeg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > [fix compile warnings, update visual studio files]
> > Signed-off-by: Marek Marczykowski-Górecki
> > <marmarek@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > This was posted before here:
> > https://lists.xenproject.org/archives/html/win-pv-devel/2015-
> > 11/msg00014.html
> > 
> > Back then I've raised a concern about code duplication caused by a
> > different API than libxc (having libxenvchan in mind). But two years
> > latter it looks like it isn't such a problem. libxenchan is the only
> > piece being effectively duplicated (at least in Qubes OS), and
> > everything else is really different anyway because of Linux/Windows
> > differences. So, I think it isn't an issue.
> > 
> > Also I've renamed XcEvtchnBindUnbound to XcEvtchnOpenUnbound, as
> > requested in review back then.
> > 
> > This has been tested with vs2017/WDK10 build for Windows 7 64bit, both
> > on Windows 7 and Windows 10. The patch assume "Add Windows 7 build
> > target" patches applied, but it should be easy to apply without them
> > too.
> > I've updated vs2015 files too, but don't have tools to test them (it
> > isn't possible to download free vs2015 anymore).
> > ---
> >  include/xencontrol.h                         | 342 ++++++++++
> >  src/xencontrol/xencontrol.c                  | 919 
> > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >  src/xencontrol/xencontrol.rc                 |  24 +
> >  src/xencontrol/xencontrol_private.h          |  49 ++
> >  vs2015/package/package.vcxproj               |   3 +
> >  vs2015/xencontrol/xencontrol.vcxproj         |  67 ++
> >  vs2015/xencontrol/xencontrol.vcxproj.filters |  13 +
> >  vs2015/xeniface.sln                          |  38 ++
> >  vs2017/package/package.vcxproj               |   3 +
> >  vs2017/xencontrol/xencontrol.vcxproj         |  67 ++
> >  vs2017/xencontrol/xencontrol.vcxproj.filters |  13 +
> >  vs2017/xeniface.sln                          |  38 ++
> >  12 files changed, 1576 insertions(+)
> >  create mode 100644 include/xencontrol.h
> >  create mode 100644 src/xencontrol/xencontrol.c
> >  create mode 100644 src/xencontrol/xencontrol.rc
> >  create mode 100644 src/xencontrol/xencontrol_private.h
> >  create mode 100644 vs2015/xencontrol/xencontrol.vcxproj
> >  create mode 100644 vs2015/xencontrol/xencontrol.vcxproj.filters
> >  create mode 100644 vs2017/xencontrol/xencontrol.vcxproj
> >  create mode 100644 vs2017/xencontrol/xencontrol.vcxproj.filters
> 
> [snip]
> 
> > +
> > +DWORD
> > +XcOpen(
> > +    IN  XENCONTROL_LOGGER *Logger,
> > +    OUT PXENCONTROL_CONTEXT *Xc
> > +    )
> > +{
> > +    HDEVINFO DevInfo;
> > +    SP_DEVICE_INTERFACE_DATA InterfaceData;
> > +    SP_DEVICE_INTERFACE_DETAIL_DATA *DetailData = NULL;
> > +    DWORD BufferSize;
> > +    PXENCONTROL_CONTEXT Context;
> > +
> > +    Context = malloc(sizeof(*Context));
> > +    if (Context == NULL)
> > +        return ERROR_NOT_ENOUGH_MEMORY;
> > +
> > +    Context->Logger = Logger;
> > +    Context->LogLevel = XLL_INFO;
> > +    Context->RequestId = 1;
> > +    InitializeListHead(&Context->RequestList);
> > +    InitializeCriticalSection(&Context->RequestListLock);
> > +
> > +    DevInfo = SetupDiGetClassDevs(&GUID_INTERFACE_XENIFACE, 0, NULL,
> > DIGCF_PRESENT | DIGCF_DEVICEINTERFACE);
> > +    if (DevInfo == INVALID_HANDLE_VALUE) {
> > +        _Log(Logger, XLL_ERROR, Context->LogLevel, __FUNCTION__,
> > +             L"XENIFACE device class doesn't exist");
> > +        goto fail;
> > +    }
> > +
> > +    InterfaceData.cbSize = sizeof(InterfaceData);
> > +    if (!SetupDiEnumDeviceInterfaces(DevInfo, NULL,
> > &GUID_INTERFACE_XENIFACE, 0, &InterfaceData)) {
> > +        _Log(Logger, XLL_ERROR, Context->LogLevel, __FUNCTION__,
> > +             L"Failed to enumerate XENIFACE devices");
> > +        goto fail;
> > +    }
> > +
> > +    SetupDiGetDeviceInterfaceDetail(DevInfo, &InterfaceData, NULL, 0,
> > &BufferSize, NULL);
> > +    if (GetLastError() != ERROR_INSUFFICIENT_BUFFER) {
> > +        _Log(Logger, XLL_ERROR, Context->LogLevel, __FUNCTION__,
> > +             L"Failed to get buffer size for device details");
> > +        goto fail;
> > +    }
> > +
> > +    // Using 'BufferSize' from failed function call
> > +#pragma warning(suppress: 6102)
> > +    DetailData = (SP_DEVICE_INTERFACE_DETAIL_DATA *)malloc(BufferSize);
> > +    if (!DetailData) {
> > +        SetLastError(ERROR_OUTOFMEMORY);
> > +        goto fail;
> > +    }
> > +
> > +    DetailData->cbSize = sizeof(SP_DEVICE_INTERFACE_DETAIL_DATA);
> > +
> > +    if (!SetupDiGetDeviceInterfaceDetail(DevInfo, &InterfaceData, 
> > DetailData,
> > BufferSize, NULL, NULL)) {
> > +        _Log(Logger, XLL_ERROR, Context->LogLevel, __FUNCTION__,
> > +             L"Failed to get XENIFACE device path");
> > +        goto fail;
> > +    }
> > +
> > +    Context->XenIface = CreateFile(DetailData->DevicePath,
> > +                                   FILE_GENERIC_READ | FILE_GENERIC_WRITE,
> > +                                   0,
> > +                                   NULL,
> > +                                   OPEN_EXISTING,
> > +                                   FILE_ATTRIBUTE_NORMAL | 
> > FILE_FLAG_OVERLAPPED,
> > +                                   NULL);
> 
> No FILE_SHARE_READ/WRITE options set, preventing creation of other handles to 
> xeniface.
> This includes the xenagent service (if started after a XenControl user), so 
> no power control, etc.
> 
> Should it be possible for more than one program to use XenControl at the same 
> time?

Yes, it should. Are you sure about the above? I do have multiple
processes using xencontrol interface at the same time and they work just
fine.

-- 
Best Regards,
Marek Marczykowski-Górecki
Invisible Things Lab
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

_______________________________________________
win-pv-devel mailing list
win-pv-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/win-pv-devel