[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4] x86/mm: Add mem access rights to NPT
On Mi, 2018-07-25 at 04:37 -0600, Jan Beulich wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 25.07.18 at 11:25, <george.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 07/24/2018 01:02 PM, Jan Beulich wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 24.07.18 at 13:26, <george.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On 07/24/2018 09:55 AM, Jan Beulich wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 23.07.18 at 15:48, <aisaila@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > + { > > > > > > + xfree(d->arch.monitor.msr_bitmap); > > > > > > + return -ENOMEM; > > > > > > + } > > > > > > + radix_tree_init(p2m->mem_access_settings); > > > > > > + } > > > > > What's the SVM connection here? Please don't forget that p2m- > > > > > pt.c > > > > > also serves the shadow case. Perhaps struct p2m_domain should > > > > > contain a boolean indicator whether this auxiliary data > > > > > structure is > > > > > needed? > > > > It's basically just "hap_enabled()" isn't it? > > > Only if we can't make it there when EPT is active. > > It can make it here when VMX is active and shadow is enabled, but > > it > > shouldn't be able to get here when EPT is active. We could add an > > ASSERT() to that effect; it should be safe in production, as the > > only > > side effect should be that we do a small pointless allocation. > So I've looked a little more closely: This is being added to > arch_monitor_init_domain(), called from vm_event_domctl(). I can't > see why this wouldn't be reachable with EPT enabled. > Hi George, Any thoughts on this? Thanks, Alex _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |