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] xenbus_dev_write and failed writes

To: Keir Fraser <keir@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] xenbus_dev_write and failed writes
From: John Levon <levon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 2 Mar 2007 16:58:00 +0000
Cc: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Delivery-date: Fri, 02 Mar 2007 08:54:09 -0800
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <C20E057A.A846%keir@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
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>
References: <20070302163535.GA22543@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <C20E057A.A846%keir@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.9i
On Fri, Mar 02, 2007 at 04:46:50PM +0000, Keir Fraser wrote:

> > Also, the BUG_ON in xenbusdrv_queue_reply() looks odd to me (in fact the
> > whole function does). Are we really guaranteed that a reply message will
> > be less than a page size? And it doesn't seem right to just stomp on the
> > buffer contents if we wrap right past the consumer value.
> Yes, it at least makes sense to discard the data rather than BUG. Actually
> we should dynamically allocate up to some rather larger threshold than 4kB.
> Will you fix this?

I doubt I'll have time to fix /both/ kernels, sorry...


Xen-devel mailing list

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