[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH V3] x86/monitor: Disallow setting mem_access_emulate_each_rep when vm_event is NULL
>>> On 29.04.16 at 18:12, <rcojocaru@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 04/09/16 08:54, Razvan Cojocaru wrote: >> It is meaningless (and potentially dangerous - see >> hvmemul_virtual_to_linear()) >> to set mem_access_emulate_each_rep before xc_monitor_enable() (which >> allocates >> vcpu->arch.vm_event) has been called, so return an error from the >> XEN_DOMCTL_MONITOR_OP_EMULATE_EACH_REP hypercall when that is the case. >> >> Signed-off-by: Razvan Cojocaru <rcojocaru@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> Reviewed-by: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx> >> >> --- >> Changes since V2: >> - Updated the if() condition as recommended by Andrew Cooper. >> - Added Andrew Cooper's Reviewed-by. >> --- >> xen/include/asm-x86/monitor.h | 16 +++++++++++++--- >> 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/xen/include/asm-x86/monitor.h b/xen/include/asm-x86/monitor.h >> index 0954b59..d367099 100644 >> --- a/xen/include/asm-x86/monitor.h >> +++ b/xen/include/asm-x86/monitor.h >> @@ -32,19 +32,29 @@ >> static inline >> int arch_monitor_domctl_op(struct domain *d, struct xen_domctl_monitor_op >> *mop) >> { >> + int rc = 0; >> + >> switch ( mop->op ) >> { >> case XEN_DOMCTL_MONITOR_OP_EMULATE_EACH_REP: >> domain_pause(d); >> - d->arch.mem_access_emulate_each_rep = !!mop->event; >> + /* >> + * Enabling mem_access_emulate_each_rep without a vm_event >> subscriber >> + * is meaningless. >> + */ >> + if ( d->max_vcpus && d->vcpu[0] && d->vcpu[0]->arch.vm_event ) >> + d->arch.mem_access_emulate_each_rep = !!mop->event; >> + else >> + rc = -EINVAL; >> + >> domain_unpause(d); >> break; >> >> default: >> - return -EOPNOTSUPP; >> + rc = -EOPNOTSUPP; >> } >> >> - return 0; >> + return rc; >> } >> >> int arch_monitor_domctl_event(struct domain *d, > > According to the previous list discussion with Andrew Cooper, this fix > might be considered for the 4.7 release, so CC-ing Wei for a release > ack, as suggested. Even if - without the pending ./MAINTAINERS adjustment - not formally required, I don't understand why you didn't Cc Tamas on this patch. I don't think this should go in without his ack. Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |