From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: =?windows-1252?Q?Roger_Pau_Monn=E9?= <roger.pau@citrix.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/3] xen: add the RTC io space to the
 blocked access list
Date: Fri, 8 May 2015 13:55:19 +0200
Message-ID: <554CA427.7050509@citrix.com>
References: <1431010459-20920-1-git-send-email-roger.pau@citrix.com>
	<1431010459-20920-3-git-send-email-roger.pau@citrix.com>
	<554CBF3B020000780007835D@mail.emea.novell.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
Received: from mail6.bemta5.messagelabs.com ([195.245.231.135])
	by lists.xen.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72)
	(envelope-from <roger.pau@citrix.com>) id 1YqgsO-0000pi-Sg
	for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Fri, 08 May 2015 11:55:32 +0000
In-Reply-To: <554CBF3B020000780007835D@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>
Cc: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>, xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

El 08/05/15 a les 13.50, Jan Beulich ha escrit:
>>>> On 07.05.15 at 16:54, <roger.pau@citrix.com> wrote:
>> @@ -1548,6 +1549,8 @@ int __init construct_dom0(
>>          rc |= ioports_deny_access(d, pmtmr_ioport, pmtmr_ioport + 3);
>>      /* PCI configuration space (NB. 0xcf8 has special treatment). */
>>      rc |= ioports_deny_access(d, 0xcfc, 0xcff);
>> +    /* Never permit direct access to the RTC/CMOS registers. */
>> +    rc |= ioports_deny_access(d, RTC_PORT(0), RTC_PORT(1));
> 
> Looks like I prematurely committed this: Did you test that Dom0
> still can access CMOS/RTC with that change? I ask because the
> ioports_access_permitted() checks in guest_io_{read,write}()
> now ought to fail for Dom0... (Apart from that on second thought
> it looks wrong also conceptionally - we don't want to deny Dom0
> access to these ports, we just don't want it to access them
> directly.)

Yes, it looks like this needs to be reverted. I think we need to do
something similar to what I've done with 0xcf8; don't add the ports to
ioports_deny_access and just trap them for PVH in setup_io_bitmap.

Roger.