On Lu, 2018-07-16 at 15:29 +, Paul Durrant wrote:
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Alexandru Isaila [mailto:aisa...@bitdefender.com]
> > Sent: 16 July 2018 15:55
> > To: xen-de...@lists.xen.org
> > Cc: Ian Jackson ; Wei Liu > com>;
> > jbeul...@suse.com; Andrew Cooper ; Paul
> > D
Any thoughts on this patch are appreciated.
Thanks,
Alex
On Lu, 2018-07-02 at 15:42 +0300, Alexandru Isaila wrote:
> From: Isaila Alexandru
>
> This patch adds access rights for the NPT pages. The access rights
> are
> saved in a radix tree with the root saved in p2m_domain. T
On Ma, 2018-07-17 at 08:03 -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > On 17.07.18 at 14:25, wrote:
> > On Lu, 2018-07-16 at 15:29 +, Paul Durrant wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > From: Alexandru Isaila [mailto:aisa...@bitdefender.com]
> > > > Sent: 16 July 2018 15:55
> > > > --- a/xe
On Mi, 2018-07-18 at 15:33 +, George Dunlap wrote:
>
> >
> > On Jul 2, 2018, at 8:42 AM, Alexandru Isaila > om> wrote:
> >
> > From: Isaila Alexandru
> >
> > This patch adds access rights for the NPT pages. The access rights
> > a
On Jo, 2018-07-19 at 04:02 -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > On 19.07.18 at 10:43, wrote:
> > On 07/19/2018 11:30 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 19.07.18 at 10:18, wrote:
> > > > On Mi, 2018-07-18 at 15:33 +, George Dunlap wr
> I will absolutely nack any interface where if the caller says,
> "Please
> remove read permission", the hypervisor says, "OK!" but then allows
> read
> permission anyway -- particularly in one which is allegedly designed
> for
> security tools.
>
> If it's not practical / more work than it's wor
> >
> > +static void p2m_set_access(struct p2m_domain *p2m, unsigned long
> > gfn,
> > + p2m_access_t a)
> > +{
> > +int rc;
> > +
> > +if ( !p2m->mem_access_settings )
> > +return;
> No error indication?
I would say ASSERT is a better choice i
On Mi, 2018-07-25 at 03:14 -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > On 25.07.18 at 10:29, wrote:
> > > >
> > > > +static void p2m_set_access(struct p2m_domain *p2m, unsigned
> > > > long
> > > > gfn,
> > > > + p2m_access_t a)
> > > > +{
> > > > +
On Ma, 2018-07-31 at 06:34 -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > On 25.07.18 at 14:14, wrote:
> > --- a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/save.c
> > +++ b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/save.c
> > @@ -85,16 +85,18 @@ int arch_hvm_load(struct domain *d, struct
> > hvm_save_header *hdr)
> > /* List of handlers f
On Ma, 2018-07-31 at 07:24 -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > On 25.07.18 at 14:14, wrote:
> > --- a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hpet.c
> > +++ b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hpet.c
> > @@ -516,8 +516,9 @@ static const struct hvm_mmio_ops hpet_mmio_ops
> > = {
> > };
> >
> >
> > -static int hpet
On Ma, 2018-07-31 at 07:32 -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > On 31.07.18 at 14:55, wrote:
> > On Ma, 2018-07-31 at 06:34 -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 25.07.18 at 14:14, wrote:
> > > > --- a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/vlapic.c
> > > >
On Ma, 2018-07-31 at 07:08 -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > On 25.07.18 at 14:14, wrote:
> > This patch is focused on moving the for loop to the caller so
> > now we can save info for a single vcpu instance with the save_one
> > handlers.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Alexandru Isa
On Ma, 2018-07-31 at 06:16 -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > On 25.07.18 at 14:14, wrote:
> > This is used to save data from a single instance.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Alexandru Isaila
> >
> > ---
> > Changes since v11:
> > - hvm_save_mtrr_msr() now returns err from
> >
On Ma, 2018-08-07 at 06:09 -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > On 03.08.18 at 15:53, wrote:
> > This is used to save data from a single instance.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Alexandru Isaila
> > ---
> > xen/arch/x86/hvm/vlapic.c | 27 +++
> > 1 file changed
>
> >
> > -hvm_get_guest_pat(v, &hw_mtrr.msr_pat_cr);
> > +memcpy(hw_mtrr.msr_mtrr_fixed, mtrr_state->fixed_ranges,
> > NUM_FIXED_MSR);
> You want to BUILD_BUG_ON() array sizes differing, and then use
> sizeof() in the call to memcpy().
>
In this case sizes are different:
msr_mtrr_fi
On Mi, 2018-07-25 at 04:37 -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > On 25.07.18 at 11:25, wrote:
> > On 07/24/2018 01:02 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 24.07.18 at 13:26, wrote:
> > > > On 07/24/2018 09:55 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > > >
On Mi, 2018-08-22 at 16:41 +0200, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 05:02:43PM +0300, Alexandru Isaila wrote:
> >
> > This patch is focused on moving changing hvm_save_one() to save one
> > typecode from one vcpu and now that the save functions get data
> > from a
> > single vcpu we
> >
> > -if ( handler(d, h) != 0 )
> > +if ( handler(d->vcpu[0], h) != 0 )
> > {
> > printk(XENLOG_G_ERR
> > - "HVM%d save: failed to save type
> > %"PRIu16"\n",
> > + "HVM d%d save: failed to save t
On Mi, 2018-08-22 at 18:15 +0300, Isaila Alexandru wrote:
> On Mi, 2018-08-22 at 16:41 +0200, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 05:02:43PM +0300, Alexandru Isaila wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > This patch is focused on moving
On Mi, 2018-08-29 at 08:13 -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > On 29.08.18 at 16:02, wrote:
> > On Mi, 2018-08-22 at 18:15 +0300, Isaila Alexandru wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mi, 2018-08-22 at 16:41 +0200, Roger Pau
On Lu, 2018-09-03 at 16:36 +0200, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 04:56:21PM +0300, Isaila Alexandru wrote:
> >
> > On Mi, 2018-08-29 at 08:13 -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> &
On Fri, 2018-09-07 at 03:48 -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > > > On 03.09.18 at 15:14, wrote:
> >
> > This patch series addresses the ideea of saving data from a single
> > vcpu instance.
> > First it starts by adding *save_one functions, then it introduces a
> > handler for the
> > new save_one* fu
On Fri, 2018-09-07 at 03:43 -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > > > On 03.09.18 at 15:14, wrote:
> >
> > This patch removes the redundant save functions and renames the
> > save_one* to save. It then changes the domain param to vcpu in the
> > save funcs and adapts print messages in order to match the
On Mon, 2018-09-10 at 07:25 -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > > > On 10.09.18 at 14:36, wrote:
> >
> > --- a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/save.c
> > +++ b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/save.c
> > @@ -155,6 +155,11 @@ int hvm_save_one(struct domain *d, unsigned
> > int typecode, unsigned int instance,
> > if ( !ctxt.data
On Mon, 2018-09-10 at 15:36 +0300, Alexandru Isaila wrote:
> This patch removes the redundant save functions and renames the
> save_one* to save. It then changes the domain param to vcpu in the
> save funcs and adapts print messages in order to match the format of
> the
> other save related message
On Mon, 2018-09-10 at 07:42 -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > > > On 10.09.18 at 15:33, wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, 2018-09-10 at 15:36 +0300, Alexandru Isaila wrote:
> > > This patch removes the redundant save functions and renames the
> > > save_one* to save. It then changes the domain param to vcpu in
On Thu, 2018-09-13 at 08:17 -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > > > On 12.09.18 at 11:47, wrote:
> >
> > The original version of the patch emulated the current instruction
> > (which, as a side-effect, emulated the page-walk as well), however
> > we
> > need finer-grained control. We want to emulate th
ter Reset" (https://so
ftware.intel.com/sites/default/files/managed/39/c5/325462-sdm-vol-1-
2abcd-3abcd.pdf page 2996).
Is this enough to be up streamed?
Regards,
Isaila Alexandru
___
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://l
On Wed, 2018-09-19 at 10:41 +0200, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 11:21:32AM +0300, Isaila Alexandru wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I want to restart the discussion on dropping the "if ( v-
> > >pause_flags &
> > VPF_down )" from
On Wed, 2018-09-19 at 03:01 -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > > > On 19.09.18 at 10:21, wrote:
> >
> > I want to restart the discussion on dropping the "if ( v-
> > >pause_flags &
> > VPF_down )" from hvm_save_cpu_ctxt() and be able to save context in
> > a
> > vcup down state. The content of the ctx
On Thu, 2018-09-20 at 07:55 -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > > > On 20.09.18 at 14:54, wrote:
> >
> > --- a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/save.c
> > +++ b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/save.c
> > @@ -165,7 +165,7 @@ int hvm_save_one(struct domain *d, unsigned int
> > typecode, unsigned int instance,
> > if ( (rv = hvm_s
On Fri, 2018-09-21 at 09:44 +0100, Wei Liu wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 21, 2018 at 09:43:22AM +0100, Wei Liu wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 21, 2018 at 10:30:30AM +0300, Alexandru Isaila wrote:
> > > This patch is needed in order to have a different return error
> > > for invalid vcpu
> > > and offline vcpu on th
On Fri, 2018-09-21 at 04:34 -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > > > On 21.09.18 at 09:30, wrote:
> >
> > --- a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/save.c
> > +++ b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/save.c
> > @@ -165,7 +165,8 @@ int hvm_save_one(struct domain *d, unsigned int
> > typecode, unsigned int instance,
> > if ( (rv = hvm_s
On Wed, 2018-07-25 at 04:37 -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > > > On 25.07.18 at 11:25, wrote:
> >
> > On 07/24/2018 01:02 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > > > > > On 24.07.18 at 13:26, wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On 07/24/2018 09:55 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > > > > > > > On 23.07.18 at 15:48, wrote:
> > > >
On Wed, 2018-09-26 at 17:47 +0100, George Dunlap wrote:
> From: Isaila Alexandru
>
> This patch adds access control for NPT mode.
>
> There aren’t enough extra bits to store the access rights in the NPT
> p2m
> table, so we add a radix tree to store extra information
On Thu, 2018-09-27 at 12:25 +0100, George Dunlap wrote:
> The name of the "with_gla" flag is confusing; it has nothing to do
> with the existence or lack thereof of a faulting GLA, but rather
> where
> the fault originated. The npfec.kind value is always valid, and
> should thus be propagated, reg
On 27.03.2020 04:30, Tian, Kevin wrote:
From: Isaila Alexandru
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2020 6:46 PM
Hi Kevin and sorry for the long reply time,
On 10.03.2020 04:04, sTian, Kevin wrote:
From: Alexandru Stefan ISAILA
Sent: Tuesday, March 3, 2020 8:23 PM
At this moment a guest can call
On 31.03.2020 10:43, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 30.03.2020 08:54, Alexandru Isaila wrote:
At this moment a guest can call vmfunc to change the altp2m view. This
should be limited in order to avoid any unwanted view switch.
The new xc_altp2m_set_visibility() solves this by making views invisible
t
Hi Kevin,
This is a kind reminder if you can have another look at the new version
of this patch.
Thanks,
Alex
On 30.03.2020 09:54, Alexandru Isaila wrote:
At this moment a guest can call vmfunc to change the altp2m view. This
should be limited in order to avoid any unwanted view switch.
The
On 10.04.2020 06:10, Tian, Kevin wrote:
diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c
index a3d115b650..375e9cf368 100644
--- a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c
+++ b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c
@@ -4511,6 +4511,7 @@ static int do_altp2m_op(
case HVMOP_altp2m_get_mem_access:
case
Are there any more r-b needed for this patch?
Thanks,
Alex
On 30.03.2020 09:54, Alexandru Isaila wrote:
At this moment a guest can call vmfunc to change the altp2m view. This
should be limited in order to avoid any unwanted view switch.
The new xc_altp2m_set_visibility() solves this by making
Hi,
I need a review for the tools bits in this patch.
Thanks,
Alex
On 13.04.2020 09:51, Alexandru Isaila wrote:
At this moment a guest can call vmfunc to change the altp2m view. This
should be limited in order to avoid any unwanted view switch.
The new xc_altp2m_set_visibility() solves this b
On 09.03.2020 13:51, Jan Beulich wrote:
There's no need for virtually everything to include public/vm_event.h.
Move its inclusion out of sched.h. This requires using the non-typedef
name in p2m_mem_paging_resume()'s prototype; by not changing the
function definition at the same time it'll remai
Hi Kevin and sorry for the long reply time,
On 10.03.2020 04:04, sTian, Kevin wrote:
From: Alexandru Stefan ISAILA
Sent: Tuesday, March 3, 2020 8:23 PM
At this moment a guest can call vmfunc to change the altp2m view. This
should be limited in order to avoid any unwanted view switch.
I lo
Hi Jan and sorry for the late reply,
On 20.10.2020 17:13, Jan Beulich wrote:
While there don't look to be any problems with this right now, the lock
order implications from holding the lock can be very difficult to follow
(and may be easy to violate unknowingly). The present callbacks don't
(a
On 23.11.2020 15:30, Jan Beulich wrote:
While there don't look to be any problems with this right now, the lock
order implications from holding the lock can be very difficult to follow
(and may be easy to violate unknowingly). The present callbacks don't
(and no such callback should) have any nee
On 12.04.2021 17:12, Jan Beulich wrote:
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of our organization. Do not click
links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content
is safe.
While doing so, make the option dependent upon HVM, which really is the
main purpose
On 12.04.2021 17:18, Tamas K Lengyel wrote:
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of our organization. Do not click
links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content
is safe.
On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 10:12 AM Jan Beulich wrote:
While doing so, make the o
On 12.04.2021 17:10, Jan Beulich wrote:
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of our organization. Do not click
links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content
is safe.
By excluding the file from being built for !HVM, #ifdef-ary can be
removed from it.
49 matches
Mail list logo
