On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 3:24 AM, George Dunlap <george.dun...@citrix.com> wrote: > On 30/01/17 17:07, Tamas K Lengyel wrote: >> Hi George, >> yeap, this solves old mem_access settings being triggered when I >> recreate altp2m views. Thanks! >> >> On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 8:17 AM, George Dunlap <george.dun...@citrix.com> >> wrote: >>> Commit 71bb7304e7a7a35ea6df4b0cedebc35028e4c159 added flushing of >>> nested p2m tables whenever the host p2m table changed. Unfortunately >>> in the process, it added a filter to the generic p2m_flush_table() >>> function so that the p2m would only be flushed if it was being used as >>> a nested p2m. This meant that the p2m was not being flushed at all >>> for altp2m callers. >>> >>> Instead do the nested p2m filtering in p2m_flush_nestedp2m(). >>> >>> NB that this is not a security issue: The only time this codepath is >>> called is in cases where either nestedp2m or altp2m is enabled, and >>> neither of them are in security support. >>> >>> Reported-by: Matt Leinhos <m...@starlab.io> >>> Signed-off-by: George Dunlap <george.dun...@citrix.com> >>> --- >>> I've smoke-tested this with nested virt and it seems to work fine. >>> Matt / Tamas, could you test this with altp2m and see if it fixes your >>> issue? >> >> Tested-by: Tamas K Lengyel <tamas.leng...@zentific.com> > > Any chance you could add a Reviewed-by to this? Can't check it in > without an R-b from a non-maintainer or an Acked-by from an x86 > maintainer. :-) >
In light of the discussion with Jan I would feel better if a R-b came from him or Tim. I'm not that familiar with the nested code base.. Tamas _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
