Re: [PATCH v10 00/12] Implement the XEN_DOMCTL_memory_mapping hypercall for ARM

[Arianna Avanzini <avanzini.arianna@gmail.com>]

On 23/08/2014 01:51, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> On Fri, 22 Aug 2014, Andrii Tseglytskyi wrote:
>> On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 9:36 PM, Arianna Avanzini
>> <avanzini.arianna@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On 22/08/2014 20:27, Andrii Tseglytskyi wrote:
>>>> Hi Arianna,
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 5:25 PM, Arianna Avanzini
>>>> <avanzini.arianna@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> On 21/08/2014 17:43, Andrii Tseglytskyi wrote:
>>>>>> Hi Arianna,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Just one more question - how iomem mapping will be handled by XSM framework?
>>>>>> I'm using older revision of your patch series and I need to do the
>>>>>> following change to permit domU working with already mapped iomem,
>>>>>> (only if XSM is enabled and FLASK is enforsed)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> commit 3f35dae860bd0f566ca156608ec53e3240aacd5a
>>>>>> Author: Andrii Tseglytskyi <andrii.tseglytskyi@globallogic.com>
>>>>>> Date:   Thu Aug 21 18:00:20 2014 +0300
>>>>>>
>>>>>>     xsm: arm: allow domU to use iomem
>>>>>>
>>>>>>     Change-Id: I7eff12b127e0d32d97a67e77dbcca3a8326dfd22
>>>>>>     Signed-off-by: Andrii Tseglytskyi <andrii.tseglytskyi@globallogic.com>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git a/tools/flask/policy/policy/modules/xen/xen.te
>>>>>> b/tools/flask/policy/policy/modules/xen/xen.te
>>>>>> index d7147fb..ac4a01d 100644
>>>>>> --- a/tools/flask/policy/policy/modules/xen/xen.te
>>>>>> +++ b/tools/flask/policy/policy/modules/xen/xen.te
>>>>>> @@ -108,6 +108,7 @@ admin_device(dom0_t, device_t)
>>>>>>  admin_device(dom0_t, irq_t)
>>>>>>  admin_device(dom0_t, ioport_t)
>>>>>>  admin_device(dom0_t, iomem_t)
>>>>>> +admin_device(domU_t, iomem_t)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  domain_comms(dom0_t, dom0_t)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Is this a point, or I missed something ?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I think this is a point, if I understood things well. Do you prefer to submit
>>>>> your patch personally if/after the memory_mapping patchset is eventually merged,
>>>>> or do you prefer that I send your patch with the memory_mapping patchset?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It would be great if you include this patch to your patch series, keep
>>>> my authority and add your sign-off-by.
>>>> Do you agree?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Of course, but I think my signed-off-by in this case is not appropriate nor
>>> required.
>>> I'll add it to the upcoming v11 with your signed-off-by and your authority, if
>>> it's OK for you. I proposed you to merge it with the memory_mapping patchset
>>> just because I think it might be simpler to review it this way.
>>>
>>
>> Sure. Completely agree. Let's proceed in this way.
> 
> Arianna,
> keeping Andrii as original Author and having his Signed-off-by line in
> the commit message is the right thing to do. However in addition to that
> you should also add yours as you are making the patch part of your
> series. Basically everybody that touches the patch needs to add her own
> Signed-off-by line for copyright reasons.
>  
> 

Hello Stefano,

thank you for pointing that out, I really didn't know that my Signed-off-by was
required. If Andrii is OK with it I'll go with his initial suggestion then.

Thank you,
Arianna


-- 
/*
 * Arianna Avanzini
 * avanzini.arianna@gmail.com
 * 73628@studenti.unimore.it
 */