This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
Home Products Support Community News


RE: [Xen-devel] [PATCH]vbd/vnif paravirtulization driver hypervisorsuppo

To: "Keir Fraser" <Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Ian Pratt" <m+Ian.Pratt@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: [Xen-devel] [PATCH]vbd/vnif paravirtulization driver hypervisorsupport]
From: "Ling, Xiaofeng" <xiaofeng.ling@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2005 23:42:57 +0800
Delivery-date: Fri, 10 Jun 2005 15:42:19 +0000
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
List-help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thread-index: AcVskrAnUGUgb8rMQFquEEC+I8EvZgBQCRpw
Thread-topic: [Xen-devel] [PATCH]vbd/vnif paravirtulization driver hypervisorsupport]
Is this patch acceptable? 
If yes, I'll continue to work out the other splitted patch.

Xiaofeng Ling <mailto:xiaofeng.ling@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I'd like to split the patch into small ones, so that it can be
> clearer. Attach is the patch of adding support copy_to/from_guest.
> Signed-off-by: Xiaofeng Ling <xiaofeng.ling@xxxxxxxxx>
>   arch/x86/x86_32/usercopy.c       |   99
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>   arch/x86/x86_64/usercopy.c       |   15 +++++
>   include/asm-x86/x86_32/uaccess.h |    5 +
>   include/asm-x86/x86_64/uaccess.h |    5 +
>   4 files changed, 124 insertions(+)
> Ling, Xiaofeng wrote:
>> Keir Fraser <mailto:Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> On 3 Jun 2005, at 03:40, Xiaofeng Ling wrote:
>>>> It's now all use shadow_mode_external, and use a permit bitmap for
>>>> hypercall from vmx domain. Do you think it's now acceptable?
>>>> It's against 1657.
>>> guest
>>> Still messy imo. When I said to split the path by
>>> shadow_mode_externel, I meant you should do it within the uaccess
>>> macros/functions; not in their callers.  guest
>> I've already done that for copy_from/to_user, but for
>> __copy_from/to_user I can not do that, because not all the caller
>> shall call copy_from/to_guest

Xen-devel mailing list

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>