[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v6 09/12] xen: add runtime parameter access support to hypfs
On 05.03.2020 07:01, Jürgen Groß wrote: > On 04.03.20 17:56, Jan Beulich wrote: >> On 04.03.2020 17:31, Jürgen Groß wrote: >>> On 04.03.20 16:19, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>> On 04.03.2020 16:07, Jürgen Groß wrote: >>>>> On 04.03.20 12:32, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>>>> On 26.02.2020 13:47, Juergen Gross wrote: >>>>>>> +static void update_ept_param_append(const char *str, int val) >>>>>>> +{ >>>>>>> + char *pos = opt_ept_setting + strlen(opt_ept_setting); >>>>>>> + >>>>>>> + snprintf(pos, sizeof(opt_ept_setting) - (pos - opt_ept_setting), >>>>>>> + ",%s=%d", str, val); >>>>>>> +} >>>>>>> + >>>>>>> +static void update_ept_param(void) >>>>>>> +{ >>>>>>> + snprintf(opt_ept_setting, sizeof(opt_ept_setting), "pml=%d", >>>>>>> opt_ept_pml); >>>>>>> + if ( opt_ept_ad >= 0 ) >>>>>>> + update_ept_param_append("ad", opt_ept_ad); >>>>>> >>>>>> This won't correctly reflect reality: If you look at >>>>>> vmx_init_vmcs_config(), even a negative value means "true" here, >>>>>> unless on a specific Atom model. I think init_ept_param() wants >>>>>> to have that erratum workaround logic moved there, such that >>>>>> you can then assme the value to be non-negative here. >>>>> >>>>> But isn't not mentioning it in the -1 case correct? -1 means: do the >>>>> correct thing on the current hardware. >>>> >>>> Well, I think the output here should represent effective settings, >>> >>> The minimum requirement is to reflect the effective parameters, like >>> cmdline is doing for boot-time only parameters. With runtime parameters >>> we had no way of telling what was set, and this is now possible. >>> >>>> and a sub-item should be suppressed only if a setting has no effect >>>> at all in the current setup, like ... >>>> >>>>>>> + if ( opt_ept_exec_sp >= 0 ) >>>>>>> + update_ept_param_append("exec-sp", opt_ept_exec_sp); >>>>>> >>>>>> I agree for this one - if the value is still -1, it has neither >>>>>> been set nor is its value of any interest. >>>> >>>> ... here. >>> >>> I think we should not mix up specified parameters and effective >>> settings. In case an effective setting is of common interest it should >>> be reported via a specific node (like e.g. specific mitigation settings >>> where the cmdline is not providing enough details). >> >> But then a boolean option that wasn't specified on the command line >> should produce no output at all. And hence we'd need a way to tell >> whether an option was set from command line for _all_ of them. I >> don't think this would be very helpful. > > I disagree here. > > This is important only for cases where the hypervisor treats the > parameter as a tristate: true/false/unspecified. In all cases where > the bool value is really true or false it can be reported as such. The problem I'm having with this is the resulting inconsistency: When we write the variable with 0 or 1 in case we find it to be -1 after command line parsing, the externally visible effect will be different from the case where we leave it to be -1 yet still treat it as (pseudo-)boolean. This, however, is an implementation detail, while imo the hypfs presentation should not depend on such implementation details. > Reporting 0/1 for e.g. "ad" if opt_ept_ad==-1 would add a latent problem > if any other action would be derived from the parameter variable being > -1. > > So either opt_ept_ad should be modified to change it to 0/1 instead of > only setting the VCMS flag, That's what I did suggest. > or the logic should be kept as is in this > patch. IMO changing the setting of opt_ept_ad should be done in another > patch if this is really wanted. And of course I don't mind at all doing so in a prereq patch. It's just that the patch here provides a good place _where_ to actually do such an adjustment. Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
|
![]() |
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |