From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Sender: List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: Received: from lists.oasis-open.org (oasis-open.org [10.110.1.242]) by lists.oasis-open.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 080DF986495 for ; Wed, 6 Oct 2021 08:35:05 +0000 (UTC) From: Cornelia Huck In-Reply-To: References: <20211006062157.21768-1-pankaj.gupta.linux@gmail.com> <874k9u1vf5.fsf@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 06 Oct 2021 10:34:50 +0200 Message-ID: <87y276zh3p.fsf@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [virtio-dev] Re: [PATCH v5] virtio-pmem: PMEM device spec Content-Type: text/plain To: Pankaj Gupta Cc: virtio-dev@lists.oasis-open.org, Stefan Hajnoczi , Dan Williams , David Hildenbrand , "Michael S . Tsirkin" , Taylor Stark , Pankaj Gupta List-ID: On Wed, Oct 06 2021, Pankaj Gupta wrote: >> > +\subsubsection{ Workload specific mapping}\label{sec:Device Types / PMEM Device / Possible Security Implications / Countermeasures / Workload} >> > +For SHARED mappings, for the workload is a single application inside >> > +the driver and there is no risk in sharing data. Device sharing >> >> Sorry for noticing this only now, but I have trouble parsing this >> sentence. Does it mean that you can use SHARED mapping if the workload >> is a single application? > > yes and if risk in sharing data is very less or acceptable. > >> >> > +same backing region with SHARED mapping can be used as a valid configuration. Hm... maybe rephrase this paragraph as: "When using SHARED mappings with a workload that is a single application inside the driver where the risk in sharing data is very low or nonexisting, the device sharing the same backing region with a SHARED mapping can be used as a valid configuration." (I hope I caught the intention correctly!) --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: virtio-dev-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org For additional commands, e-mail: virtio-dev-help@lists.oasis-open.org