[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [Xen-devel] [PATCH] x86: small fixes to pcpu platform op handling
XENPF_get_cpuinfo should init the flags output field rather than only modify it. XENPF_cpu_online must check for the input CPU number to be in range. XENPF_cpu_offline must also do that, and should also reject attempts to offline CPU 0 (this fails in cpu_down() too, but preventing this here appears more correct given that the code here calls continue_hypercall_on_cpu(0, ...), which would be flawed if cpu_down() would ever allow bringing down CPU 0 (and a distinct error code is easier to deal with when debugging issues). Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx> --- a/xen/arch/x86/platform_hypercall.c +++ b/xen/arch/x86/platform_hypercall.c @@ -449,13 +449,14 @@ ret_t do_platform_op(XEN_GUEST_HANDLE(xe if ( (g_info->xen_cpuid >= nr_cpu_ids) || !cpu_present(g_info->xen_cpuid) ) { - g_info->flags |= XEN_PCPU_FLAGS_INVALID; + g_info->flags = XEN_PCPU_FLAGS_INVALID; } else { g_info->apic_id = x86_cpu_to_apicid[g_info->xen_cpuid]; g_info->acpi_id = acpi_get_processor_id(g_info->xen_cpuid); ASSERT(g_info->apic_id != BAD_APICID); + g_info->flags = 0; if (cpu_online(g_info->xen_cpuid)) g_info->flags |= XEN_PCPU_FLAGS_ONLINE; } @@ -472,7 +473,7 @@ ret_t do_platform_op(XEN_GUEST_HANDLE(xe { int cpu = op->u.cpu_ol.cpuid; - if ( !cpu_present(cpu) ) + if ( cpu >= nr_cpu_ids || !cpu_present(cpu) ) { ret = -EINVAL; break; @@ -493,7 +494,13 @@ ret_t do_platform_op(XEN_GUEST_HANDLE(xe { int cpu = op->u.cpu_ol.cpuid; - if ( !cpu_present(cpu) ) + if ( cpu == 0 ) + { + ret = -EOPNOTSUPP; + break; + } + + if ( cpu >= nr_cpu_ids || !cpu_present(cpu) ) { ret = -EINVAL; break; Attachment:
x86-pcpu-op.patch _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |