Re: [Xen-devel] [RFC/PATCH] XENMEM_claim_pages (subop of an existing) hypercall

[Dan Magenheimer <dan.magenheimer@xxxxxxxxxx>]

> From: Jan Beulich [mailto:JBeulich@xxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2012 4:24 AM
> To: Ian Campbell; Dan Magenheimer
> Cc: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; KonradWilk; Zhigang Wang; Keir (Xen.org); 
> Tim(Xen.org)
> Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [RFC/PATCH] XENMEM_claim_pages (subop of an 
> existing) hypercall
> 
> >>> On 15.11.12 at 11:47, Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Tue, 2012-11-13 at 22:23 +0000, Dan Magenheimer wrote:
> >> This is a first cut of the hypervisor patch of the proposed
> >> XENMEM_claim_pages hypercall/subop.
> >
> > Who is expected to be able to call this? I think a XENMEM subop implies
> > that the guest itself, plus perhaps any controlling stubdom (e.g. qemu)
> > could call
> > it, which I don't think is desirable.
> >
> > Should this be limited to the toolstack only and therefore be a subop of
> > domctl or some other hypercall?
> 
> Oh, yes, absolutely. Whether making it a domctl (where it doesn't
> belong except for that aspect) I'm not that sure, though.

I've added an IS_PRIV(current->domain) check in v3.  If this is
incorrect or insufficient, please let me know!

Thanks,
Dan

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel