|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
xen-devel
Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/4] hvm: NUMA guest: extend memops hypercall
Keir Fraser wrote:
On 4/7/08 12:14, "Andre Przywara" <andre.przywara@xxxxxxx> wrote:
Should unprivileged domUs be allowed to specify the NUMA node they allocate
from, regardless of whether they even run there? Seems like a breakage of
guest isolation to me.
Good catch (I code in HVM land most of the time), I hope this small
(attached) patch fixes this.
Looking some more, I still don't see that this patch can work. Don't the
subfunctions in memory.c go and OR in MEMF_node() values on top of what the
caller may have specified??
Maybe I don't get your question right, but the only part where the
caller specified node number is used is the line I handled in the last
patch. Later they only use the member memflags of struct memop_args, not
struct xen_memory_reservation. If the node number is not specified (or
blocked), it will be later determined by looking at the current
scheduled pCPU (and thus node), but this is the current behavior anyway.
Regards,
Andre.
--
Andre Przywara
AMD-OSRC (Dresden)
Tel: x84917
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
|
|
|
|