[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [PATCH v7] xen/domain: rewrite emulation_flags_ok()
On Tue, Jun 10, 2025 at 02:45:12PM +0000, dmkhn@xxxxxxxxx wrote: > From: Denis Mukhin <dmukhin@xxxxxxxx> > > Rewrite emulation_flags_ok() to simplify future modifications. > > No functional change intended. > > Signed-off-by: Denis Mukhin <dmukhin@xxxxxxxx> > --- > Changes since v6: > - simplified checks for PV further > > Link to v6: > https://lore.kernel.org/xen-devel/20250610004216.3012253-1-dmukhin@xxxxxxxx/ > Link to CI: > https://gitlab.com/xen-project/people/dmukhin/xen/-/pipelines/1862559089 > --- > xen/arch/x86/domain.c | 78 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------- > 1 file changed, 60 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/domain.c b/xen/arch/x86/domain.c > index 7536b6c871..fdbd064ebf 100644 > --- a/xen/arch/x86/domain.c > +++ b/xen/arch/x86/domain.c > @@ -743,32 +743,74 @@ int arch_sanitise_domain_config(struct > xen_domctl_createdomain *config) > return 0; > } > > +/* > + * Verify that the domain's emulation flags resolve to a supported > configuration. > + * > + * This ensures we only allow a known, safe subset of emulation combinations > + * (for both functionality and security). Arbitrary mixes are likely to cause > + * errors (e.g. null pointer dereferences). > + * > + * NB: use the internal X86_EMU_XXX symbols, not the public XEN_X86_EMU_XXX > + * symbols. Not sure if it's worth expanding the sentence a bit to add the reason why X86_EMU_XXX should be used (so that we take build-time config options into account for short-circuited emulations). > + */ > static bool emulation_flags_ok(const struct domain *d, uint32_t emflags) > { > + enum { > + CAP_PV = BIT(0, U), > + CAP_HVM = BIT(1, U), > + CAP_HWDOM = BIT(2, U), > + CAP_DOMU = BIT(3, U), > + }; You probably want to name this type. > + static const struct { > + unsigned int caps; So it can be used here > + uint32_t min; > + uint32_t opt; > + } configs[] = { > +#ifdef CONFIG_PV > + /* PV dom0 and domU */ > + { > + .caps = CAP_PV | CAP_HWDOM | CAP_DOMU, > + .opt = X86_EMU_PIT, > + }, > +#endif /* #ifdef CONFIG_PV */ > + > +#ifdef CONFIG_HVM > + /* PVH dom0 */ > + { > + .caps = CAP_HVM | CAP_HWDOM, > + .min = X86_EMU_LAPIC | X86_EMU_IOAPIC | X86_EMU_VPCI, > + }, > + > + /* PVH domU */ > + { > + .caps = CAP_HVM | CAP_DOMU, > + .min = X86_EMU_LAPIC, > + }, > + > + /* HVM domU */ > + { > + .caps = CAP_HVM | CAP_DOMU, > + .min = X86_EMU_ALL & ~(X86_EMU_VPCI | X86_EMU_USE_PIRQ), > + /* HVM PIRQ feature is user-selectable. */ > + .opt = X86_EMU_USE_PIRQ, > + }, > +#endif /* #ifdef CONFIG_HVM */ > + }; > + unsigned int i; > + unsigned int caps = (is_pv_domain(d) ? CAP_PV : CAP_HVM) | > + (is_hardware_domain(d) ? CAP_HWDOM : CAP_DOMU); And here instead of using unsigned int? > + > #ifdef CONFIG_HVM > /* This doesn't catch !CONFIG_HVM case but it is better than nothing */ > BUILD_BUG_ON(X86_EMU_ALL != XEN_X86_EMU_ALL); > #endif > > - if ( is_hvm_domain(d) ) > - { > - if ( is_hardware_domain(d) && > - emflags != (X86_EMU_VPCI | X86_EMU_LAPIC | X86_EMU_IOAPIC) ) > - return false; > - if ( !is_hardware_domain(d) && > - /* HVM PIRQ feature is user-selectable. */ > - (emflags & ~X86_EMU_USE_PIRQ) != > - (X86_EMU_ALL & ~(X86_EMU_VPCI | X86_EMU_USE_PIRQ)) && > - emflags != X86_EMU_LAPIC ) > - return false; > - } > - else if ( emflags != 0 && emflags != X86_EMU_PIT ) > - { > - /* PV or classic PVH. */ > - return false; > - } > + for ( i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(configs); i++ ) > + if ( (caps & configs[i].caps) == caps && > + (emflags & ~configs[i].opt) == configs[i].min ) > + return true; > > - return true; > + return false; > } > > void __init arch_init_idle_domain(struct domain *d) > -- > 2.34.1 > >
|
![]() |
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |