[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [RFC PATCH 2/3] arch, arm32: add the XEN_DOMCTL_memory_mapping hypercall
On 03/04/2014 03:42 AM, Julien Grall wrote: > Hi Dario, > > On 03/03/14 23:33, Dario Faggioli wrote: >> On lun, 2014-03-03 at 23:20 +0800, Julien Grall wrote: >>> On 03/03/14 19:56, Dario Faggioli wrote: >> >>>> Right. FTR, xen/arch/x86/domain_build.c, has this (also in >>>> construct_dom0): >>>> >>>> /* DOM0 is permitted full I/O capabilities. */ >>>> rc |= ioports_permit_access(dom0, 0, 0xFFFF); >>>> rc |= iomem_permit_access(dom0, 0UL, ~0UL); >>>> rc |= irqs_permit_access(dom0, 1, nr_irqs_gsi - 1); >>>> >>>> Do you want a patch to that/similar effect? >>> >>> Yes. Maybe a bit more smarter than permitting full I/0 caps for dom0. >>> >> EhEh... do you mean to say that x86 is "not smart" ? :-) > > No :). > >> >>>> So, this is probably me messing up with the terminology, but what >>>> 'devices passthrough to it [dom0]' would mean, for example in cases >>>> where we don't have an IOMMU (like cubie* boards), and hence where >>>> proper passtrhogh will never be, I think, supported? Or do we plan to >>>> have it working there too? >>> >>> My term seems to be wrong for dom0 :). >>> >>> On ARM, some device is used by Xen and therefore not exposed to dom0. By >>> passthrough to dom0 I meant every device that are given to dom0, no >>> matter if the platform has an IOMMU. >>> >> Ok, now I got it. >> >>> I think DOM0 should only be able to map theses devices to a guest. It >>> seems stupid to allow dom0 mapping RAM or the UART used by Xen. >>> >> I see, and it does make sense. >> >> Of course, I really don't know what these devices are and what the best >> approach would be to hide/revoke permissions to their iomem/irqs (e.g., >> allow everything and then revoke some, allow selectively in the first >> place, etc.). > > I think the best place to permit access is in map_device > (xen/arch/arm/domain_build.c). > > This function is called for every devices used by dom0 to map I/O mem and > IRQ. > Thank you both for making this point more clear to me. I have tried to fix as specified. >> >> I'm quite sure Arianna is keen on helping with this, but it better be, >> if possible, someone of you ARM folks suggesting her what, where and >> how. :-) > > Either the ML or #xenarm channel on Freenode are the best to ask question. > Arianna, I advice you to join the IRC channel if it's not already the case ;). > > Cheers, > -- /* * Arianna Avanzini * avanzini.arianna@xxxxxxxxx * 73628@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx */ _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |