From: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>
To: Bhupinder Thakur <bhupinder.thakur@linaro.org>
Cc: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org,
Julien Grall <julien.grall@arm.com>,
Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/11] xen/arm: vpl011: Refactor evtchn_send in Xen to allow sending events from a xen bound channel
Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2017 16:13:55 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170303211355.GF18423@char.us.ORACLE.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1487676368-22356-4-git-send-email-bhupinder.thakur@linaro.org>
On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 04:56:00PM +0530, Bhupinder Thakur wrote:
> Breakup evtchn_send() to allow sending events for a Xen bound channel. Currently,
> there is a check in evtchn_send() i.e. is_consumer_xen() that if the event channel
> is bound to a xen consumer then event generation is not allowed for that channel.
> This check is to disallow a guest from raising an event via this channel. However,
Did any code archeology help in idenfitying why this was done this way?
You should explain why it was done - what was the use case , and why
your change will not change this semantic.
> it should allow Xen to send a event via this channel as it is required for sending
> vpl011 event to the dom0.
>
> This change introduces a new function raw_evtchn_send() which sends the event
> without this check. The current evtchn_send() calls this function after doing the
.. and without taking a lock? Why?
> xen consumer check. Xen uses the raw_evtchm_send() version to send the event thus
> bypassing the check.
>
> Signed-off-by: Bhupinder Thakur <bhupinder.thakur@linaro.org>
> ---
> xen/common/event_channel.c | 49 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------
> xen/include/xen/event.h | 6 ++++++
> 2 files changed, 42 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/xen/common/event_channel.c b/xen/common/event_channel.c
> index 638dc5e..4b039f3 100644
> --- a/xen/common/event_channel.c
> +++ b/xen/common/event_channel.c
> @@ -27,6 +27,7 @@
> #include <xen/keyhandler.h>
> #include <xen/event_fifo.h>
> #include <asm/current.h>
> +#include <xen/domain_page.h>
>
> #include <public/xen.h>
> #include <public/event_channel.h>
> @@ -650,25 +651,21 @@ static long evtchn_close(struct domain *d1, int port1, bool_t guest)
> return rc;
> }
>
> -int evtchn_send(struct domain *ld, unsigned int lport)
> +int raw_evtchn_send(struct domain *ld, unsigned int lport, void *data)
> {
> struct evtchn *lchn, *rchn;
> struct domain *rd;
> - int rport, ret = 0;
> + int rport, ret=0;
Please that code as is.
>
> - if ( !port_is_valid(ld, lport) )
> - return -EINVAL;
> -
> - lchn = evtchn_from_port(ld, lport);
> -
> - spin_lock(&lchn->lock);
> -
> - /* Guest cannot send via a Xen-attached event channel. */
> - if ( unlikely(consumer_is_xen(lchn)) )
> + if ( !data )
> {
> - ret = -EINVAL;
> - goto out;
> + if ( !port_is_valid(ld, lport) )
> + return -EINVAL;
> + lchn = evtchn_from_port(ld, lport);
> + spin_lock(&lchn->lock);
That won't do. Please keep the format of the old code as much
as possible (hint: Those newlines).
> }
> + else
> + lchn = (struct evtchn *)data;
>
> ret = xsm_evtchn_send(XSM_HOOK, ld, lchn);
> if ( ret )
> @@ -696,6 +693,32 @@ int evtchn_send(struct domain *ld, unsigned int lport)
> }
>
> out:
> + if ( !data )
> + spin_unlock(&lchn->lock);
> +
> + return ret;
> +}
> +
> +int evtchn_send(struct domain *ld, unsigned int lport)
> +{
> + struct evtchn *lchn;
> + int ret;
> +
> + if ( !port_is_valid(ld, lport) )
> + return -EINVAL;
> +
> + lchn = evtchn_from_port(ld, lport);
> +
> + spin_lock(&lchn->lock);
> +
> + if ( unlikely(consumer_is_xen(lchn)) )
> + {
> + printk("evtchn_send failed to send via xen event channel\n");
No. Please do not.
> + return -EINVAL;
> + }
> +
> + ret = raw_evtchn_send(ld, lport, lchn);
> +
> spin_unlock(&lchn->lock);
>
> return ret;
> diff --git a/xen/include/xen/event.h b/xen/include/xen/event.h
> index 5008c80..9bd17db 100644
> --- a/xen/include/xen/event.h
> +++ b/xen/include/xen/event.h
> @@ -45,6 +45,12 @@ void send_guest_pirq(struct domain *, const struct pirq *);
> /* Send a notification from a given domain's event-channel port. */
> int evtchn_send(struct domain *d, unsigned int lport);
>
> +/*
> + * This function is same as evntchn_send() except it does not do xen consumer check
> + * to allow the events to be sent from xen bound channels.
And it also looks to ignore the locking? Could you explain why?
> + */
> +int raw_evtchn_send(struct domain *ld, unsigned int lport, void *data);
> +
> /* Bind a local event-channel port to the specified VCPU. */
> long evtchn_bind_vcpu(unsigned int port, unsigned int vcpu_id);
>
> --
> 2.7.4
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-devel mailing list
> Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
> https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-03-03 21:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 82+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-02-21 11:25 [PATCH 00/11] pl011 emulation support in Xen Bhupinder Thakur
2017-02-21 11:25 ` [PATCH 01/11] xen/arm: vpl011: Add pl011 uart emulation " Bhupinder Thakur
2017-02-26 21:37 ` Julien Grall
2017-03-03 19:19 ` Julien Grall
2017-03-21 13:27 ` Bhupinder Thakur
2017-03-21 19:38 ` Julien Grall
2017-03-23 9:44 ` Bhupinder Thakur
2017-03-23 13:51 ` Julien Grall
2017-03-03 19:59 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2017-03-05 1:04 ` Julien Grall
2017-03-06 14:22 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2017-03-05 1:15 ` Julien Grall
2017-03-05 11:59 ` Julien Grall
2017-03-22 5:50 ` Bhupinder Thakur
2017-03-05 12:12 ` Julien Grall
2017-03-23 9:14 ` Bhupinder Thakur
2017-03-23 14:16 ` Julien Grall
2017-03-24 10:39 ` Bhupinder Thakur
2017-02-21 11:25 ` [PATCH 02/11] xen/arm: vpl011: Add new hvm params in Xen for ring buffer/event setup Bhupinder Thakur
2017-03-03 20:02 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2017-03-24 6:58 ` Bhupinder Thakur
2017-03-05 12:35 ` Julien Grall
2017-03-06 8:06 ` Jan Beulich
2017-03-06 11:42 ` Julien Grall
2017-03-06 12:41 ` Jan Beulich
2017-03-06 13:21 ` Julien Grall
2017-03-06 13:48 ` Jan Beulich
2017-03-08 14:45 ` Julien Grall
2017-03-08 15:21 ` Jan Beulich
2017-03-08 18:22 ` Stefano Stabellini
2017-04-11 14:38 ` Bhupinder Thakur
2017-04-11 22:07 ` Stefano Stabellini
2017-04-14 7:12 ` Bhupinder Thakur
2017-04-19 18:43 ` Stefano Stabellini
2017-03-06 14:48 ` George Dunlap
2017-03-08 13:52 ` Julien Grall
2017-03-24 7:31 ` Bhupinder Thakur
2017-02-21 11:26 ` [PATCH 03/11] xen/arm: vpl011: Refactor evtchn_send in Xen to allow sending events from a xen bound channel Bhupinder Thakur
2017-03-03 21:13 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk [this message]
2017-03-06 10:16 ` Bhupinder Thakur
2017-03-06 10:35 ` Jan Beulich
2017-03-05 12:39 ` Julien Grall
2017-03-06 8:15 ` Jan Beulich
2017-03-06 10:44 ` Bhupinder Thakur
2017-03-06 10:54 ` Jan Beulich
2017-03-06 11:12 ` Bhupinder Thakur
2017-03-28 9:43 ` Bhupinder Thakur
2017-02-21 11:26 ` [PATCH 04/11] xen/arm: vpl011: Enable vpl011 emulation for a domain in Xen Bhupinder Thakur
2017-03-03 21:47 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2017-03-05 12:46 ` Julien Grall
2017-03-06 8:27 ` Jan Beulich
2017-02-21 11:26 ` [PATCH 05/11] xen/arm: vpl011: Initialize nr_spis in vgic_init in Xen to atleast 1 Bhupinder Thakur
2017-03-03 20:49 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2017-03-05 12:51 ` Julien Grall
2017-03-16 6:50 ` Bhupinder Thakur
2017-03-16 8:24 ` Julien Grall
2017-03-16 10:31 ` Bhupinder Thakur
2017-03-16 13:24 ` Julien Grall
2017-03-20 16:29 ` Bhupinder Thakur
2017-02-21 11:26 ` [PATCH 06/11] xen/arm: vpl011: Add a new pl011 uart node in the guest DT in the toolstack Bhupinder Thakur
2017-03-03 20:15 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2017-03-03 21:03 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2017-03-05 12:59 ` Julien Grall
2017-03-05 13:04 ` Julien Grall
2017-03-14 13:00 ` Wei Liu
2017-02-21 11:26 ` [PATCH 07/11] xen/arm: vpl011: Add two new vpl011 parameters to xenstore Bhupinder Thakur
2017-03-03 20:58 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2017-03-28 7:49 ` Bhupinder Thakur
2017-02-21 11:26 ` [PATCH 08/11] xen/arm: vpl011: Allocate a new PFN in the toolstack and pass to Xen using a hvm call Bhupinder Thakur
2017-03-03 20:51 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2017-03-05 13:07 ` Julien Grall
2017-02-21 11:26 ` [PATCH 09/11] xen/arm: vpl011: Modify domain_create_ring in xenconsole to map the ring buffer and event channel Bhupinder Thakur
2017-03-03 21:46 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2017-02-21 11:26 ` [PATCH 10/11] xen/arm: vpl011: Modify handle_ring_read and buffer_append to read/append vpl011 data Bhupinder Thakur
2017-03-03 21:06 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2017-02-21 11:26 ` [PATCH 11/11] xen/arm: vpl011: Modify handle_tty_read in xenconsole to redirect user data to vpl011 IN ring buffer Bhupinder Thakur
2017-03-03 21:17 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2017-03-03 20:23 ` [PATCH 00/11] pl011 emulation support in Xen Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2017-03-03 21:15 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2017-03-14 7:44 ` Bhupinder Thakur
2017-03-05 11:46 ` Julien Grall
2017-03-14 7:47 ` Bhupinder Thakur
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20170303211355.GF18423@char.us.ORACLE.com \
--to=konrad.wilk@oracle.com \
--cc=bhupinder.thakur@linaro.org \
--cc=julien.grall@arm.com \
--cc=sstabellini@kernel.org \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).