[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 10/15] flask: remove xen_flask_userlist operation
- To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>
- From: Daniel De Graaf <dgdegra@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2016 09:08:31 -0400
- Cc: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Delivery-date: Fri, 10 Jun 2016 13:08:57 +0000
- Ironport-phdr: 9a23:HEfeWhJPDuMyjAz02dmcpTZWNBhigK39O0sv0rFitYgUI/zxwZ3uMQTl6Ol3ixeRBMOAu6MC1LWd7vyocFdDyKjCmUhKSIZLWR4BhJdetC0bK+nBN3fGKuX3ZTcxBsVIWQwt1Xi6NU9IBJS2PAWK8TWM5DIfUi/yKRBybrysXNWC3oLoiKvvp9X6WEZhunmUWftKNhK4rAHc5IE9oLBJDeIP8CbPuWZCYO9MxGlldhq5lhf44dqsrtY4q3wD89pozcNLUL37cqIkVvQYSW1+ayFm2dfv/SXnYUPPoyFEEzZerh0dIQHDpDv3Q5PwuSuy4shX1TSePMb2ZaspQjnk5KBuHkzGkiACYhIw9mDajoRcgep0uhuoqVQrz4HYbY6PPdJib6jdepUcXmMHUcFPAX8SSrigZpcCWrJSdd1TqJPw8h5X90Oz
- List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xen.org>
On 06/10/2016 02:51 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 09.06.16 at 18:43, <dgdegra@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 06/09/2016 12:07 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 09.06.16 at 16:47, <dgdegra@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
--- a/xen/include/public/xsm/flask_op.h
+++ b/xen/include/public/xsm/flask_op.h
@@ -70,20 +70,6 @@ struct xen_flask_transition {
uint32_t newsid;
};
-struct xen_flask_userlist {
- /* IN: starting SID for list */
- uint32_t start_sid;
- /* IN: size of user string and output buffer
- * OUT: number of SIDs returned */
- uint32_t size;
- union {
- /* IN: user to enumerate SIDs */
- XEN_GUEST_HANDLE(char) user;
- /* OUT: SID list */
- XEN_GUEST_HANDLE(uint32) sids;
- } u;
-};
No known users or not, we don't normally allow breaking code that
may be consuming any of our public headers. I.e. conventionally,
for interfaces not restricted to the tool stack we keep everything,
but guard it with a __XEN_INTERFACE_VERSION__ conditional.
Whether making an exception here is okay I'm not certain; in any
event would you imo need to bump XEN_FLASK_INTERFACE_VERSION.
OK, then I'll drop this patch.
Well, no, please don't drop it, make it add aforementioned #if-s.
(And after thinking about it again, bumping the interface version
doesn't seem to make sense for a plain removal.)
Ah, I misunderstood your comment - I read the conditional as belonging
to the code instead of the header, which makes a lot more sense.
Does the value of __XEN_LATEST_INTERFACE_VERSION__ need to be bumped to
0x00040800 after the branching process?
--
Daniel De Graaf
National Security Agency
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
