[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 2/4] sysctl/libxl: Add interface for returning IO topology data
On 08/12/14 15:19, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>> On 08.12.14 at 15:56, <boris.ostrovsky@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>>> Additionally please add IN and OUT annotations. When I first saw >>>>> this I assumed they would all be OUT (in which case the long running >>>>> loop problem mentioned in the reply to one of the other patches >>>>> wouldn't have been there), matching their CPU counterpart... >>>> I don't follow this. Are you saying that if ti->max_devs in patch 3/4 is >>>> an IN (which it is) then we don't have to guard for long-running loops? >>> If they were all OUT then there wouldn't be a way for the entire >>> operation to be fooled into going over more devices than there are >>> in the system. >> Assuming I add continuations to the loop, too many devices wouldn't be a >> problem for the hypervisor, would it? If an unreasonable number is >> provided then eventually copy_from_guest() will fault. > Continuations would address the concern, but it doesn't seem like > their use is really warranted here. It depends. I have one server I have to hand looks like: [root@mpx1 ~]# lspci | wc -l 1759 (And I believe this one isn't fully populated with devices.) A continuation is possibly warranted in a case like this, particularly if an HVM domain is making this hypercall. ~Andrew _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |