>>> On 29.10.15 at 20:47, wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 02:55:25AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> >>> On 28.10.15 at 20:00, wrote:
>> > @@ -302,9 +315,14 @@ DO(xen_version)(int cmd, XEN_GUEST_HANDLE_PARAM(void)
>> > arg)
>> > if ( copy_from_guest(&fi, arg, 1) )
>> > return
On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 02:55:25AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 28.10.15 at 20:00, wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 11:42:41AM -0400, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> >> Perhaps an another option would be to return success and fill out the
> >> value with an empty string?
> >>
> >> That act
>>> On 28.10.15 at 20:00, wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 11:42:41AM -0400, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
>> Perhaps an another option would be to return success and fill out the
>> value with an empty string?
>>
>> That actually sounds nicer.
I disagree. You still change the ABI this way, the m
On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 11:42:41AM -0400, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 09, 2015 at 09:14:00AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > >>> On 09.10.15 at 15:25, wrote:
> > > On Fri, Oct 09, 2015 at 01:15:42PM +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> > >> On 09/10/15 09:17, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > >> O
On Fri, Oct 09, 2015 at 09:14:00AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 09.10.15 at 15:25, wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 09, 2015 at 01:15:42PM +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> >> On 09/10/15 09:17, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >> On 09.10.15 at 04:56, wrote:
> >> >> However they also change the behavior of the
>>> On 09.10.15 at 15:25, wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 09, 2015 at 01:15:42PM +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>> On 09/10/15 09:17, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 09.10.15 at 04:56, wrote:
>> >> However they also change the behavior of the existing hypercall
>> >> for XENVER_[compile_info|changeset|commandlin
>>> On 09.10.15 at 14:15, wrote:
> On 09/10/15 09:17, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> The more that the tool stack uses the two, and as we know
>> tool stacks or parts thereof can live in unprivileged domains.
>
> I would argue than a fully unprivileged toolstack domain has no need for
> any information fr
On Fri, Oct 09, 2015 at 01:15:42PM +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 09/10/15 09:17, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 09.10.15 at 04:56, wrote:
> >> However they also change the behavior of the existing hypercall
> >> for XENVER_[compile_info|changeset|commandline] and make them
> >> dom0 accessible. T
On 09/10/15 09:17, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 09.10.15 at 04:56, wrote:
>> However they also change the behavior of the existing hypercall
>> for XENVER_[compile_info|changeset|commandline] and make them
>> dom0 accessible. This is if XSM is built in or not (though with
>> XSM one can expose it to
>>> On 09.10.15 at 04:56, wrote:
> However they also change the behavior of the existing hypercall
> for XENVER_[compile_info|changeset|commandline] and make them
> dom0 accessible. This is if XSM is built in or not (though with
> XSM one can expose it to a guest if desired).
Wasn't the outcome o
10 matches
Mail list logo
