On 08/11/2018 10:05, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 07.11.18 at 18:52, wrote:
>> On 10/31/2018 11:19 PM, Xin Li (Talons) wrote:
>>> In patchset v4, we call register_xsm() to setup silo module.
>>> This debug log is to check if some ops not overrided by the module.
>>> I thought this is OK, since the l
>>> On 07.11.18 at 18:52, wrote:
> On 10/31/2018 11:19 PM, Xin Li (Talons) wrote:
>> In patchset v4, we call register_xsm() to setup silo module.
>> This debug log is to check if some ops not overrided by the module.
>> I thought this is OK, since the log level is debug.
>>
>> I think calling reg
> -Original Message-
> From: Daniel De Graaf [mailto:dgde...@tycho.nsa.gov]
> Sent: Thursday, November 8, 2018 1:53 AM
> To: Xin Li (Talons) ; Andrew Cooper
>
> Cc: Xen-devel List
> Subject: Re: XSM SILO boot time spew
> If SILO is a good example of what a potential third XSM module woul
On 10/31/2018 11:19 PM, Xin Li (Talons) wrote:
In patchset v4, we call register_xsm() to setup silo module.
This debug log is to check if some ops not overrided by the module.
I thought this is OK, since the log level is debug.
I think calling register_xsm() is good,
if we do want to suppress th
In patchset v4, we call register_xsm() to setup silo module.
This debug log is to check if some ops not overrided by the module.
I thought this is OK, since the log level is debug.
I think calling register_xsm() is good,
if we do want to suppress this debug log explicitly,
we can check if ops eqau
Hello,
I've noticed that the SILO code causes the following debug spew:
(XEN) XSM Framework v1.0.0 initialized
(XEN) Initialising XSM SILO mode
(XEN) dummy.c:31: Had to override the security_domaininfo security
operation with the dummy one.
(XEN) dummy.c:32: Had to override the domain_create secu
