From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Daniel De Graaf <dgdegra@tycho.nsa.gov>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 05/10] xsm: add XENMEM_soft_reset support
Date: Fri, 22 May 2015 10:58:47 -0400
Message-ID: <555F4427.5020302@tycho.nsa.gov>
References: <1431510585-12544-1-git-send-email-vkuznets@redhat.com>
	<1431510585-12544-6-git-send-email-vkuznets@redhat.com>
	<555F15C1020000780007D211@mail.emea.novell.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
Received: from mail6.bemta3.messagelabs.com ([195.245.230.39])
	by lists.xen.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72)
	(envelope-from <dgdegra@tycho.nsa.gov>) id 1YvoPr-0002aa-5I
	for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Fri, 22 May 2015 14:59:15 +0000
In-Reply-To: <555F15C1020000780007D211@mail.emea.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>, Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>
Cc: Olaf Hering <olaf@aepfle.de>, Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com>, Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com>, Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com>, Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>, Julien Grall <julien.grall@linaro.org>, Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com>, Andrew Jones <drjones@redhat.com>, Tim Deegan <tim@xen.org>, David Vrabel <david.vrabel@citrix.com>, xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, Keir Fraser <keir@xen.org>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On 05/22/2015 05:40 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 13.05.15 at 11:49, <vkuznets@redhat.com> wrote:
>> --- a/xen/include/xsm/dummy.h
>> +++ b/xen/include/xsm/dummy.h
>> @@ -193,6 +193,13 @@ static XSM_INLINE int xsm_memory_exchange(XSM_DEFAULT_ARG struct domain *d)
>>       return xsm_default_action(action, current->domain, d);
>>   }
>>
>> +static XSM_INLINE int xsm_memory_soft_reset(XSM_DEFAULT_ARG struct domain *d1,
>> +					    struct domain *d2)
>> +{
>> +    XSM_ASSERT_ACTION(XSM_PRIV);
>> +    return xsm_default_action(action, current->domain, NULL);
>> +}
>
> Why XSM_PRIV instead of XSM_TARGET against _both_ domains?
>
> Jan

Unless there is a change in how XSM_TARGET is implemented, the result
is going to be equivalent: it is not possible for a domain to have
more than one target at a time, so if current->domain is not dom0,
then one of the two XSM_TARGET checks will fail.

-- 
Daniel De Graaf
National Security Agency