| |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
xen-devel
Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] VT-d: improve RMRR validity checking
|
To: |
Weidong Han <weidong.han@xxxxxxxxx> |
|
Subject: |
Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] VT-d: improve RMRR validity checking |
|
From: |
Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@xxxxxx> |
|
Date: |
Tue, 9 Mar 2010 14:39:10 -0700 |
|
Cc: |
"xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Noboru Iwamatsu <n_iwamatsu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Cihula, Joseph" <joseph.cihula@xxxxxxxxx>, "Kay, Allen M" <allen.m.kay@xxxxxxxxx>, "linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|
Delivery-date: |
Tue, 09 Mar 2010 13:40:17 -0800 |
|
Dkim-signature: |
v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:sender:received:in-reply-to :references:date:x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=f6/Ob/A/pj2vzf1Wo33ziQI64nitr5JiMK4/W4Ssp80=; b=sxEQpDVRvBAv7kU6JI/MlAIJMpyDXbFwCwKReFs8uZSdmsWX+fGshNYd93DcTXWNuH jUspypsw9YbeY7ln5FRzYxfmGaMYf2oX7wyebpp/1aSJH2CQWvSzekbz0ghH2yggDNOs tyj7x7sOPCl0tZQgpvcEexz2g/V2IspPoWqNI= |
|
Domainkey-signature: |
a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=gjtjFJaI4RsehLN/3k1wju22AB6NL/NXymCXwRm8CopP+X8AKffg8AJN64IBV+0rGP Lih1qTePH2CcNWvTaeF/9pHLbyqPlHgh/lI885FqTsNbAvlbekP8ggnJehY613iu1Nna xW3wdTx3eKwIAvRv5rJpE337OY+pg7k9AG8OE= |
|
Envelope-to: |
www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
|
In-reply-to: |
<4B59660F.4000909@xxxxxxxxx> |
|
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/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe> |
|
List-unsubscribe: |
<http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe> |
|
References: |
<C77E162B.6FE6%keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4B59098B.6000108@xxxxxxxxx> <4B590FA4.4000008@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4B59132B.40607@xxxxxxxxx> <4B59188C.50901@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4B59660F.4000909@xxxxxxxxx> |
|
Sender: |
xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 1:47 AM, Weidong Han <weidong.han@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I implemented a patch and attached.
>
> patch description:
> In order to make Xen more defensive to VT-d related BIOS issue, this patch
> ignores a DRHD if all devices under its scope are not pci discoverable, and
> regards a DRHD as invalid and then disable whole VT-d if some devices under
> its scope are not pci discoverable. But if iommu=force is set, it will
> enable all DRHDs reported by BIOS, to avoid any security vulnerability with
> malicious s/s re-enabling "supposed disabled" devices. Pls note that we
> don't know the devices under the "Include_all" DRHD are existent or not,
> because the scope of "Include_all" DRHD won't enumerate common pci device,
> it only enumerates I/OxAPIC and HPET devices.
Hi All,
I have a system with what I consider to be a valid DRHD that's getting
tripped up on this patch. The problem is that the DRHD includes an
IOAPIC scope, where the IOAPIC is not materialized on the PCI bus. I
think Xen is being overzealous in it's validity checking and that this
is a valid configuration. What do others think? Are IOAPICs a
special case that we can allow to be non-existent on the PCI bus?
Thanks,
Alex
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
|
|
| |
|
Home