[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1407322366.15946.8.camel@hamster.uk.xensource.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2014 11:52:46 +0100
From: Frediano Ziglio <frediano.ziglio@...rix.com>
To: David Vrabel <david.vrabel@...rix.com>
CC: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
xen-devel <xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org>,
<linux-api@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] xen: Implement ioctl to restrict privcmd to a
specific domain
On Tue, 2014-08-05 at 14:45 +0100, David Vrabel wrote:
> On 05/08/14 14:42, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> >
> > - Some of these hypercalls don't have an ABI so we can't depend
> > on them being stable. How do you want to handle that?
>
> We are not going any further with this series because of this.
>
> David
Well, this is partially true. We agree the patches as they are cannot be
accepted however in the long term we'd like to find a solution.
The current ABI from user-space to kernel defined by these patches is
perfectly fine (just two ioctl to restrict event channel/privcmd to a
specific domain).
For the implementation we were looking at different approaches:
- add an additional target field in vcpu structure to restrict to a
target for a particular vCPU with some additional hypercalls (like
multicall) that restrict contained hypercalls to a domain;
- an additional hypercall to do domctl but with restriction (this
probably require less changes to current patches);
- using flask. This looks easy to implement but currently code does not
deals well with vCPUs as labels are attached to domains.
Frediano
--
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