linux-kernel - Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] allow xenfb initialization for hvm guests

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <52B1BFD4.7090702@citrix.com>
Date:	Wed, 18 Dec 2013 15:31:32 +0000
From:	Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@...rix.com>
To:	Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>
CC:	Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@...rix.com>, <david.vrabel@...rix.com>,
	<xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@...citrix.com>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] allow xenfb initialization for hvm guests

On 18/12/13 15:14, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 11:51:22AM +0000, Ian Campbell wrote:
>> On Tue, 2013-12-17 at 17:53 +0000, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
>>> There is no reasons why an HVM guest shouldn't be allowed to use xenfb.
>>> As a matter of fact ARM guests, HVM from Linux POV, can use xenfb.
>>> Given that no Xen toolstacks configure a xenfb backend for x86 HVM
>>> guests, they are not affected.
>> and if a toolstack did I think it would be reasonable to expect the
>> kernel to at least try and drive it!
>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@...citrix.com>
>> Acked-by: Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@...rix.com>
> I think David Vrabel is going to Nack it unless there is a test-case.
>
> I am saying that because in his previous statement for Wei's multi-page
> patches was that if there are no users (or at least no test-cases) then
> it should not be part of the kernel.

Without trying to presume too much, I really don't think he would.

This patch is taking an existing thing and permitting it to work in more
cases (which is a good change IMO).

The multi-page rings was completely brand new functionality with no
consumers at all, so no ability to verify the implementation.  It is a
completely different context.

~Andrew
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/