Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen/xen_initial_domain: check that xen_start_info is initialized

[Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, 4 Oct 2012, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 03.10.12 at 19:08, Stefano Stabellini 
> >>> <Stefano.Stabellini@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
> > Since commit commit 4c071ee5268f7234c3d084b6093bebccc28cdcba ("arm:
> > initial Xen support") PV on HVM guests can be xen_initial_domain.
> > However PV on HVM guests might have an unitialized xen_start_info, so
> > check before accessing its fields.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Acked-by: Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Reported-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > 
> > diff --git a/include/xen/xen.h b/include/xen/xen.h
> > index 9a39ca5..e7101bb 100644
> > --- a/include/xen/xen.h
> > +++ b/include/xen/xen.h
> > @@ -28,7 +28,7 @@ extern enum xen_domain_type xen_domain_type;
> >  #include <asm/xen/hypervisor.h>
> >  
> >  #define xen_initial_domain()       (xen_domain() && \
> > -                            xen_start_info->flags & SIF_INITDOMAIN)
> > +                            xen_start_info && xen_start_info->flags & 
> > SIF_INITDOMAIN)
> >  #else  /* !CONFIG_XEN_DOM0 */
> >  #define xen_initial_domain()       (0)
> >  #endif     /* CONFIG_XEN_DOM0 */
> 
> Didn't your other patch statically initialize it?

Yes. Even though both patches can safely coexist, I wrote this one as an
alternative solution.

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel