[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [V12 PATCH 3/4] pvh dom0: Add and remove foreign pages
>>> On 13.05.14 at 03:02, <mukesh.rathor@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, 12 May 2014 11:34:14 +0100 > "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> >>> On 10.05.14 at 02:50, <mukesh.rathor@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > +static int atomic_write_ept_entry(ept_entry_t *entryptr, >> > ept_entry_t new, >> > + int level) >> > +{ >> > + unsigned long oldmfn = INVALID_MFN; >> > + bool_t skip_foreign = (new.mfn == entryptr->mfn && >> > + new.sa_p2mt == entryptr->sa_p2mt); >> >> This still seems too weak to me: Shouldn't you also consider whether >> the old and new entries respectively are present (also further down)? > > Not sure I understand why. skip_foreign is combined with p2m_is_foreign: > > if ( unlikely(p2m_is_foreign(new.sa_p2mt)) && !skip_foreign ) > { > ... > so checking for invalid entry seems redundant based on my > understanding that invalid entries have sa_p2mt == 1, or are > zeroed, in which case sa_p2mt == 0. I didn't say invalid, I said present (i.e. at least one of r, w, or x set). For example, it needs to be carefully considered whether the second of the two switch() statements in ept_p2m_type_to_flags() could have any effect that would require references to be dropped when all three flags end up being clear. >> > @@ -292,7 +332,7 @@ static bool_t ept_invalidate_emt(mfn_t mfn, >> > bool_t recalc) e.emt = MTRR_NUM_TYPES; >> > if ( recalc ) >> > e.recalc = 1; >> > - atomic_write_ept_entry(&epte[i], e); >> > + atomic_write_ept_entry(&epte[i], e, level); >> >> I'm afraid you mustn't ever ignore this function failing (i.e. unless >> you're in places where you know the non-leaf shortcut is always >> going to be taken, but even there I think you'd be better off >> documenting this via ASSERT()), for security reasons. And yes, I >> realize that this isn't going to be trivial in some cases, especially >> if you want to do better than domain_crash(). > > Hmmm... since p2m type can only change via ept_set_entry, all other > callers are guaranteed success, or IOW, the function is effectively same > as before for other callers. As such, an ASSERT combined with printk > should be acceptable IMO. Please see below. Okay, I agree with this argumentation for the moment (where changes to/from p2m_foreign can only be explicit, and indeed only through that one path). But the issue raised next may already yield this invalid once addressed. >> And a more general question: How is the insertion of p2m_foreign >> entries working together with the controlled domain (i.e. the one >> owning the page) being subject to paging/sharing? I only recall >> fixme-s having got added for the two features presently not being >> supported for PVH domains... > > Right, the two features are not supported presently, the caller will > get -EINVAL if attempted. No further progress. Will it? Where is that being enforced? I just went down (as an example) subarch_memory_op() -> do_mem_event_op() -> mem_paging_memop() without spotting any restriction on either d or current->domain. (I'm anyway surprised by the rather small amount of matches 'grep -ir "pvh.*fixme"' turns up - did some get lost in the many patch iterations? Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |