[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 2/2] x86/dmar: zap DMAR signature for dom0 once in TBOOT case
On 2018/8/20 16:30, Jan Beulich wrote: Cosmetic change, I feel it isn't necessory to zap a copy of DMAR table which is freed later.On 20.08.18 at 05:32, <zhenzhong.duan@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:When TBOOT enabled, acpi_parse_dmar() zap a copy of DMAR table rather than the real table, so make it controled by config option based on the fact that we already have done the real zapping in tboot_parse_dmar_table().Is this just a cosmetic change, or is there any harm done by the extra zapping? Thanks Zhenzhong As said above, acpi_parse_dmar() doesn't zaps APCI DMAR signature in real TXT heap table, fix the stale comments. Signed-off-by: Zhenzhong Duan <zhenzhong.duan@xxxxxxxxxx> --- xen/arch/x86/tboot.c | 3 +-- xen/drivers/passthrough/vtd/dmar.c | 2 ++ 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)You've again failed to Cc maintainers (included now). Jan--- a/xen/arch/x86/tboot.c +++ b/xen/arch/x86/tboot.c @@ -490,8 +490,7 @@ int __init tboot_parse_dmar_table(acpi_table_handler dmar_handler) rc = dmar_handler(dmar_table); xfree(dmar_table);- /* acpi_parse_dmar() zaps APCI DMAR signature in TXT heap table */- /* but dom0 will read real table, so must zap it there too */ + /* Dom0 will read real DMAR table, so must zap it there */ acpi_dmar_zap();return rc;--- a/xen/drivers/passthrough/vtd/dmar.c +++ b/xen/drivers/passthrough/vtd/dmar.c @@ -866,8 +866,10 @@ static int __init acpi_parse_dmar(struct acpi_table_header *table) }out:+#ifndef CONFIG_TBOOT /* Zap ACPI DMAR signature to prevent dom0 using vt-d HW. */ acpi_dmar_zap(); +#endif return ret; } _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |