On Mon, 2020-09-28 at 12:58 +0200, Jan Beulich wrote: > Before and after XSA-342 there has been an asymmetry in how not > really > usable ports get treated in do_poll(): Ones beyond a certain boundary > (max_evtchns originally, valid_evtchns subsequently) did get refused > with -EINVAL, while lower ones were accepted despite there > potentially > being no way to wake the vCPU again from its polling state. Arrange > to > also honor evtchn_usable() output in the decision. > > Requested-by: Andrew Cooper <andrew.coop...@citrix.com> > Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeul...@suse.com> > Reviewed-by: Dario Faggioli <dfaggi...@suse.com>
I agree with Julien that a comment about how evtchn_port_poll() would improve things even further. Regards -- Dario Faggioli, Ph.D http://about.me/dario.faggioli Virtualization Software Engineer SUSE Labs, SUSE https://www.suse.com/ ------------------------------------------------------------------- <<This happens because _I_ choose it to happen!>> (Raistlin Majere)
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
