Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH for-4.5 v6 05/16] tools: Add vmware_port support

[George Dunlap <george.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 09/22/2014 10:22 PM, Don Slutz wrote:
> On 09/22/14 12:34, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> > On 22/09/14 14:41, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > > On Sat, 2014-09-20 at 14:07 -0400, Don Slutz wrote:
> > > > This new libxl_domain_create_info field is used to set
> > > > XEN_DOMCTL_CDF_vmware_port for the xc_domain_create() routine.
> > > Does this really need to be a CDF, rather than a domctl/hvm param?
> > I have made the argument that many things which are currently HVM Params
> > should be CDF, as they absolutely should be set and immutable for the
> > entire lifetime of the domain.
> >
> >  From recollection, we have had several XSAs in the past which are
> > directly attributable to the toolstack or guest being able to play with
> > an (insufficiently locked down) HVM param after boot.
> >
> > Using a CDF avoids potential issues along these lines.
> It also allow setting up v->arch.hvm_vmx.exception_bitmap at
> the right time.  domctl/hvm params are setup much latter in
> the life of a domain.
Isn't that already modified on a cr change (a la vmx_update_guest_cr())?

Or did you mean the SVM side?

I'm not making an argument either way (although at the moment I'm more 
sympathetic to Andy's view), just questioning whether setting the exit 
flag is that much of an argument one way or another.
 -George


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