From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A2BCC433DF for ; Thu, 2 Jul 2020 20:29:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.xenproject.org (lists.xenproject.org [192.237.175.120]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2E8C3207D4 for ; Thu, 2 Jul 2020 20:29:34 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 2E8C3207D4 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=cert.pl Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=xen-devel-bounces@lists.xenproject.org Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.xenproject.org) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1jr5pW-0007sU-2Y; Thu, 02 Jul 2020 20:29:10 +0000 Received: from all-amaz-eas1.inumbo.com ([34.197.232.57] helo=us1-amaz-eas2.inumbo.com) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1jr5pV-0007sP-1I for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Thu, 02 Jul 2020 20:29:09 +0000 X-Inumbo-ID: ad2751c0-bca2-11ea-88b5-12813bfff9fa Received: from bagnar.nask.net.pl (unknown [195.187.242.196]) by us1-amaz-eas2.inumbo.com (Halon) with ESMTPS id ad2751c0-bca2-11ea-88b5-12813bfff9fa; Thu, 02 Jul 2020 20:29:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bagnar.nask.net.pl (unknown [172.16.9.10]) by bagnar.nask.net.pl (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6FD1A37DD; Thu, 2 Jul 2020 22:29:05 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by bagnar.nask.net.pl (Postfix) with ESMTP id D13B2A3664; Thu, 2 Jul 2020 22:29:04 +0200 (CEST) Received: from bagnar.nask.net.pl ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (bagnar.nask.net.pl [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10032) with ESMTP id WcG16VrIrpmI; Thu, 2 Jul 2020 22:29:04 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by bagnar.nask.net.pl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 396F2A37DD; Thu, 2 Jul 2020 22:29:04 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at bagnar.nask.net.pl Received: from bagnar.nask.net.pl ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (bagnar.nask.net.pl [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id ZXkfElhBcH6q; Thu, 2 Jul 2020 22:29:04 +0200 (CEST) Received: from belindir.nask.net.pl (belindir-ext.nask.net.pl [195.187.242.210]) by bagnar.nask.net.pl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08F30A3664; Thu, 2 Jul 2020 22:29:04 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by belindir.nask.net.pl (Postfix) with ESMTP id E297E22E3F; Thu, 2 Jul 2020 22:28:33 +0200 (CEST) Received: from belindir.nask.net.pl ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (belindir.nask.net.pl [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10032) with ESMTP id iVaWd6boHJqx; Thu, 2 Jul 2020 22:28:28 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by belindir.nask.net.pl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5DA6422E40; Thu, 2 Jul 2020 22:28:28 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at belindir.nask.net.pl Received: from belindir.nask.net.pl ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (belindir.nask.net.pl [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id mx456RbkkZ2G; Thu, 2 Jul 2020 22:28:28 +0200 (CEST) Received: from belindir.nask.net.pl (belindir.nask.net.pl [172.16.10.10]) by belindir.nask.net.pl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3236022E3F; Thu, 2 Jul 2020 22:28:28 +0200 (CEST) Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2020 22:28:28 +0200 (CEST) From: =?utf-8?Q?Micha=C5=82_Leszczy=C5=84ski?= To: Julien Grall Message-ID: <187614050.18497785.1593721708078.JavaMail.zimbra@cert.pl> In-Reply-To: References: <3fa0c3e7-9243-b1bb-d6ad-a3bd21437782@xen.org> <0e02a9b5-ba7a-43a2-3369-a4410f216ddb@suse.com> <9a3f4d58-e5ad-c7a1-6c5f-42aa92101ca1@xen.org> <7f915146-6566-e5a7-14d2-cb2319838562@xen.org> <7ac383c2-0264-cc75-a85b-13c1fdfb0bd6@suse.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 02/10] x86/vmx: add IPT cpu feature MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Originating-IP: [172.16.10.10] X-Mailer: Zimbra 8.6.0_GA_1194 (ZimbraWebClient - GC83 (Win)/8.6.0_GA_1194) Thread-Topic: x86/vmx: add IPT cpu feature Thread-Index: ayJ3lBVi1JgJBZhMzn8HOkHk4Vrvhw== X-BeenThere: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Xen developer discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Kevin Tian , Stefano Stabellini , tamas lengyel , Jan Beulich , Wei Liu , Andrew Cooper , Ian Jackson , George Dunlap , Jun Nakajima , xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, luwei kang , Roger Pau =?utf-8?Q?Monn=C3=A9?= Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xenproject.org Sender: "Xen-devel" ----- 2 lip 2020 o 16:31, Julien Grall julien@xen.org napisa=C5=82(a): > On 02/07/2020 15:17, Jan Beulich wrote: >> On 02.07.2020 16:14, Julien Grall wrote: >>> On 02/07/2020 14:30, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>> On 02.07.2020 11:57, Julien Grall wrote: >>>>> On 02/07/2020 10:18, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>>>> On 02.07.2020 10:54, Julien Grall wrote: >>>>>>> On 02/07/2020 09:50, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>>>>>> On 02.07.2020 10:42, Julien Grall wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 02/07/2020 09:29, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>>> Another way to do it, would be the toolstack to do the mapping. At wh= ich >>>>> point, you still need an hypercall to do the mapping (probably the >>>>> hypercall acquire). >>>> >>>> There may not be any mapping to do in such a contrived, fixed-range >>>> environment. This scenario was specifically to demonstrate that the >>>> way the mapping gets done may be arch-specific (here: a no-op) >>>> despite the allocation not being so. >>> You are arguing on extreme cases which I don't think is really helpful >>> here. Yes if you want to map at a fixed address in a guest you may not >>> need the acquire hypercall. But in most of the other cases (see has for >>> the tools) you will need it. >>> >>> So what's the problem with requesting to have the acquire hypercall >>> implemented in common code? >>=20 >> Didn't we start out by you asking that there be as little common code >> as possible for the time being? >=20 > Well as I said I am not in favor of having the allocation in common > code, but if you want to keep it then you also want to implement > map/unmap in the common code ([1], [2]). >=20 >> I have no issue with putting the >> acquire implementation there ... > This was definitely not clear given how you argued with extreme cases... >=20 > Cheers, >=20 > [1] <9a3f4d58-e5ad-c7a1-6c5f-42aa92101ca1@xen.org> > [2] >=20 > -- > Julien Grall Guys, could you express your final decision on this topic? While I understand the discussion and the arguments you've raised, I would like to know what particular elements should be moved where. So are we going abstract way, or non-abstract-x86 only way? Best regards, Micha=C5=82 Leszczy=C5=84ski CERT Polska