[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v3 3/3] tools: introduce parameter max_wp_ram_ranges.





On 2/2/2016 6:32 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 01.02.16 at 18:05, <Ian.Jackson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Having said that, if the hypervisor maintainers are happy with a
situation where this value is configured explicitly, and the
configurations where a non-default value is required is expected to be
rare, then I guess we can live with it.

Well, from the very beginning I have been not very happy with
the introduction of this, and I still consider it half way acceptable
only because of not seeing any good alternative. If we look at
it strictly, it's in violation of the rule we set forth after XSA-77:
No introduction of new code making the system susceptible to
bad (malicious) tool stack behavior, and hence we should reject
it. Yet that would leave XenGT in a state where it would have no
perspective of ever getting merged, which doesn't seem very
desirable either.

Jan


Thanks, Jan.
I understand your concern, and to be honest, I do not think
this is an optimal solution. But I also have no better idea
in mind.  :(
Another option may be: instead of opening this parameter to
the tool stack, we use a XenGT flag, which set the rangeset
limit to a default value. But like I said, this default value
may not always work on future XenGT platforms.


B.R.
Yu

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


 


Rackspace

Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.