|
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [Xen-devel] [PATCH] x86: small fixes to pcpu platform op handling
XENPF_get_cpuinfo should init the flags output field rather than only
modify it.
XENPF_cpu_online must check for the input CPU number to be in range.
XENPF_cpu_offline must also do that, and should also reject attempts to
offline CPU 0 (this fails in cpu_down() too, but preventing this here
appears more correct given that the code here calls
continue_hypercall_on_cpu(0, ...), which would be flawed if cpu_down()
would ever allow bringing down CPU 0 (and a distinct error code is
easier to deal with when debugging issues).
Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>
--- a/xen/arch/x86/platform_hypercall.c
+++ b/xen/arch/x86/platform_hypercall.c
@@ -449,13 +449,14 @@ ret_t do_platform_op(XEN_GUEST_HANDLE(xe
if ( (g_info->xen_cpuid >= nr_cpu_ids) ||
!cpu_present(g_info->xen_cpuid) )
{
- g_info->flags |= XEN_PCPU_FLAGS_INVALID;
+ g_info->flags = XEN_PCPU_FLAGS_INVALID;
}
else
{
g_info->apic_id = x86_cpu_to_apicid[g_info->xen_cpuid];
g_info->acpi_id = acpi_get_processor_id(g_info->xen_cpuid);
ASSERT(g_info->apic_id != BAD_APICID);
+ g_info->flags = 0;
if (cpu_online(g_info->xen_cpuid))
g_info->flags |= XEN_PCPU_FLAGS_ONLINE;
}
@@ -472,7 +473,7 @@ ret_t do_platform_op(XEN_GUEST_HANDLE(xe
{
int cpu = op->u.cpu_ol.cpuid;
- if ( !cpu_present(cpu) )
+ if ( cpu >= nr_cpu_ids || !cpu_present(cpu) )
{
ret = -EINVAL;
break;
@@ -493,7 +494,13 @@ ret_t do_platform_op(XEN_GUEST_HANDLE(xe
{
int cpu = op->u.cpu_ol.cpuid;
- if ( !cpu_present(cpu) )
+ if ( cpu == 0 )
+ {
+ ret = -EOPNOTSUPP;
+ break;
+ }
+
+ if ( cpu >= nr_cpu_ids || !cpu_present(cpu) )
{
ret = -EINVAL;
break;
Attachment:
x86-pcpu-op.patch _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
![]() |
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |