From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH for-4.6] xen/mm: populate_physmap: validate
 correctly the gfn for direct mapped domain
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2015 11:41:43 +0100
Message-ID: <1439462503.23981.81.camel@citrix.com>
References: <1439314888-24813-1-git-send-email-julien.grall@citrix.com>
	<1439458426.23981.37.camel@citrix.com>
	<55CC8580020000780009A90A@prv-mh.provo.novell.com>
	<1439460884.23981.59.camel@citrix.com>
	<55CC8DC5020000780009A9D6@prv-mh.provo.novell.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
Received: from mail6.bemta5.messagelabs.com ([195.245.231.135])
	by lists.xen.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72)
	(envelope-from <prvs=66097562a=Ian.Campbell@citrix.com>)
	id 1ZPpxE-0006uV-5u
	for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Thu, 13 Aug 2015 10:41:48 +0000
In-Reply-To: <55CC8DC5020000780009A9D6@prv-mh.provo.novell.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>
Cc: Wei.Liu2@citrix.com, Tim Deegan <tim@xen.org>, Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com>, Julien Grall <julien.grall@citrix.com>, stefano.stabellini@citrix.com, xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, Keir Fraser <keir@xen.org>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On Thu, 2015-08-13 at 04:29 -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > 
> > > > On 13.08.15 at 12:14, <ian.campbell@citrix.com> wrote:
> > There isn't a race here is there? What if the reference were dropped 
> > after
> > this check but before the guest_physmap_add_page (which takes new
> > references)? We are implicitly relying on a guarantee made elsewhere 
> > that a
> > direct mapped guest never drops the final ref until it is destroyed 
> > (which
> > can't be happening in this window I think), but it would be obviously 
> > safer
> > against such bugs if we just held the ref until after the p2m was 
> > updated.
> 
> Yeah, we depend on this, and what you suggest would indeed be
> an improvment.
> 
> > Another thing for a future/4.7 cleanup I guess.
> 
> Right.
> 
> But as bottom line I take it that your objections to the patch going in
> soon have been eliminated?

Correct.

Acked-by: Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com>