Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v7] x86/altp2m: Added xc_altp2m_set_mem_access_multi()

[Razvan Cojocaru <rcojocaru@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 23.10.2017 11:41, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 23.10.17 at 10:34, <rcojocaru@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
>>
>> On 23.10.2017 11:10, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>>>> On 20.10.17 at 18:32, <rcojocaru@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>> On 10/20/2017 07:15 PM, Wei Liu wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 08:07:41PM +0300, Petre Pircalabu wrote:
>>>>>> From: Razvan Cojocaru <rcojocaru@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> For the default EPT view we have xc_set_mem_access_multi(), which
>>>>>> is able to set an array of pages to an array of access rights with
>>>>>> a single hypercall. However, this functionality was lacking for the
>>>>>> altp2m subsystem, which could only set page restrictions for one
>>>>>> page at a time. This patch addresses the gap.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> HVMOP_altp2m_set_mem_access_multi has been added as a HVMOP (as opposed 
>>>>>> to a
>>>>>> DOMCTL) for consistency with its HVMOP_altp2m_set_mem_access counterpart 
>> (and
>>>>>> hence with the original altp2m design, where domains are allowed - with 
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> proper altp2m access rights - to alter these settings), in the absence 
>>>>>> of an
>>>>>> official position on the issue from the original altp2m designers.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Razvan Cojocaru <rcojocaru@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Petre Pircalabu <ppircalabu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The title is a bit misleading -- this patch actually contains changes to
>>>>> hypervisor as well.
>>>>
>>>> Sorry, I have assumed that the hypervisor changes are implied. We're
>>>> happy to change it. Would "x86/altp2m: Added
>>>> xc_altp2m_set_mem_access_multi() and hypervisor support" be better?
>>>
>>> But please not again "Added" - we've had this discussion before.
>>> The title is supposed to tell what a patch does, not what the state
>>> of the code is after it was applied.
>>
>> Will do, how does "{xen,libxc}/altp2m: support for setting restrictions
>> for an array of pages" sound?
> 
> The text is fine, but I'm not sure the {xen,libxc} part of the prefix
> is really very useful.

I was hoping to address Wei's comment with it - 'xen' would stand for
the hypervisor part, and 'libxc' for the toolstack part. However, you're
right: for one, the 'x86' part was useful, and then the problem before
was not so much that it didn't explicitly specify 'xen', but that it
implied that the changes have more to do with libxc (because it
mentioned xc_altp2m_set_mem_access_multi()).

"x86/altp2m: support for setting restrictions for an array of pages" it
is then. :) Sorry for causing confusion!


Thanks,
Razvan

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