netdev - Re: [net-next 1/2] xen-netback: add module parameter to disable ctrl-ring

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: <818b5f7c-92ce-dca9-ee83-c6220c8292da@amazon.com>
Date:   Sun, 21 Mar 2021 22:00:21 +0100
From:   "Hsu, Chiahao" <andyhsu@...zon.com>
To:     Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
CC:     Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        <wei.liu@...nel.org>, <paul@....org>, <davem@...emloft.net>,
        <kuba@...nel.org>, <xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org>
Subject: Re: [net-next 1/2] xen-netback: add module parameter to disable ctrl-ring



Andrew Lunn 於 2021/3/21 21:29 寫道:
> CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you can confirm the sender and know the content is safe.
>
>
>
>>> At the end, it will be more granular module parameter that user still
>>> will need to guess.
>> I believe users always need to know any parameter or any tool's flag before
>> they use it.
>> For example, before user try to set/clear this ctrl_ring_enabled, they
>> should already have basic knowledge about this feature,
>> or else they shouldn't use it (the default value is same as before), and
>> that's also why we use the 'ctrl_ring_enabled' as parameter name.
> To me, it seems you are fixing this problem in the wrong place. As a
> VM user in the cloud, i have no idea how the cloud provider needs the
> VM configured to allow the cloud provider to migrate the VM to
> somewhere else in the bitbarn. As the VM user, it should not be my
> problem. I would expect the cloud provider to configure the VM host to
> only expose facilities to the VM which allows it to be migrated.
'the users' I mentioned it's the cloud provider, not a VM user. Sorry 
for the confusion.
And agree with you, just wondering how the cloud provider can expose the 
facilities to the VM if there's no way to set/clr it at runtime, unless 
reconfigure kernel?  These features are enabled by default.
>
> This is a VM host problem, not a VM problem.
>
>       Andrew


Thanks