Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/2] vm_event: Sanitize vm_event response handling

2016-09-15 Thread George Dunlap
On 14/09/16 16:11, Tamas K Lengyel wrote: > On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 7:38 AM, George Dunlap > wrote: >> On 13/09/16 19:12, Tamas K Lengyel wrote: >>> Setting response flags in vm_event are only ever safe if the vCPUs are >>> paused. >>> To reflect this we move all checks within the if block that

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/2] vm_event: Sanitize vm_event response handling

2016-09-14 Thread Tamas K Lengyel
On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 9:15 AM, Julien Grall wrote: > > > On 14/09/16 16:14, Tamas K Lengyel wrote: >> >> On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 3:33 AM, Julien Grall >> wrote: >>> >>> Hello Tamas, >>> >>> On 13/09/16 19:12, Tamas K Lengyel wrote: diff --git a/xen/include/asm-arm/p2m.h b/xen/inc

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/2] vm_event: Sanitize vm_event response handling

2016-09-14 Thread Julien Grall
On 14/09/16 16:14, Tamas K Lengyel wrote: On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 3:33 AM, Julien Grall wrote: Hello Tamas, On 13/09/16 19:12, Tamas K Lengyel wrote: diff --git a/xen/include/asm-arm/p2m.h b/xen/include/asm-arm/p2m.h index 53c4d78..5e9bc54 100644 --- a/xen/include/asm-arm/p2m.h +++ b/xen/i

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/2] vm_event: Sanitize vm_event response handling

2016-09-14 Thread Tamas K Lengyel
On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 3:33 AM, Julien Grall wrote: > Hello Tamas, > > On 13/09/16 19:12, Tamas K Lengyel wrote: >> >> diff --git a/xen/include/asm-arm/p2m.h b/xen/include/asm-arm/p2m.h >> index 53c4d78..5e9bc54 100644 >> --- a/xen/include/asm-arm/p2m.h >> +++ b/xen/include/asm-arm/p2m.h >> @@ -1

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/2] vm_event: Sanitize vm_event response handling

2016-09-14 Thread Tamas K Lengyel
On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 7:38 AM, George Dunlap wrote: > On 13/09/16 19:12, Tamas K Lengyel wrote: >> Setting response flags in vm_event are only ever safe if the vCPUs are >> paused. >> To reflect this we move all checks within the if block that already checks >> whether this is the case. Checks

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/2] vm_event: Sanitize vm_event response handling

2016-09-14 Thread George Dunlap
On 13/09/16 19:12, Tamas K Lengyel wrote: > Setting response flags in vm_event are only ever safe if the vCPUs are paused. > To reflect this we move all checks within the if block that already checks > whether this is the case. Checks that are only supported on one architecture > we relocate the bi

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/2] vm_event: Sanitize vm_event response handling

2016-09-14 Thread Julien Grall
Hello Tamas, On 13/09/16 19:12, Tamas K Lengyel wrote: diff --git a/xen/include/asm-arm/p2m.h b/xen/include/asm-arm/p2m.h index 53c4d78..5e9bc54 100644 --- a/xen/include/asm-arm/p2m.h +++ b/xen/include/asm-arm/p2m.h @@ -121,10 +121,10 @@ typedef enum { p2m_to_mask(p

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/2] vm_event: Sanitize vm_event response handling

2016-09-14 Thread Razvan Cojocaru
On 09/13/2016 09:12 PM, Tamas K Lengyel wrote: > Setting response flags in vm_event are only ever safe if the vCPUs are paused. > To reflect this we move all checks within the if block that already checks > whether this is the case. Checks that are only supported on one architecture > we relocate t

[Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/2] vm_event: Sanitize vm_event response handling

2016-09-13 Thread Tamas K Lengyel
Setting response flags in vm_event are only ever safe if the vCPUs are paused. To reflect this we move all checks within the if block that already checks whether this is the case. Checks that are only supported on one architecture we relocate the bitmask operations to the arch-specific handlers to