[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <534529A40200007800007055@nat28.tlf.novell.com>
Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2014 10:06:12 +0100
From: "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@...e.com>
To: <konrad@...nel.org>
Cc: <david.vrabel@...rix.com>, <xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org>,
<boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>,
"Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk" <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <keir@....org>
Subject: Re: [XEN PATCH 1/2] hvm: Support more than 32 VCPUS when
migrating.
>>> On 08.04.14 at 19:25, <konrad@...nel.org> wrote:
> --- a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c
> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c
> @@ -3470,6 +3470,9 @@ static long hvm_vcpu_op(
> case VCPUOP_stop_singleshot_timer:
> case VCPUOP_register_vcpu_info:
> case VCPUOP_register_vcpu_time_memory_area:
> + case VCPUOP_down:
> + case VCPUOP_up:
> + case VCPUOP_is_up:
This, if I checked it properly, leaves only VCPUOP_initialise,
VCPUOP_send_nmi, and VCPUOP_get_physid disallowed for HVM.
None of which look inherently bad to be used by HVM (but
VCPUOP_initialise certainly would need closer checking), so I
wonder whether either the wrapper shouldn't be dropped altogether
or at least be converted from a white list approach to a black list one.
Jan
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists