Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] lock down hypercall continuation encoding masks

[Tim Deegan <tim@xxxxxxx>]

At 11:31 +0000 on 05 Dec (1417775465), Jan Beulich wrote:
> Andrew validly points out that even if these masks aren't a formal part
> of the hypercall interface, we aren't free to change them: A guest
> suspended for migration in the middle of a continuation would fail to
> work if resumed on a hypervisor using a different value. Hence add
> respective comments to their definitions.
> 
> Additionally, to help future extensibility as well as in the spirit of
> reducing undefined behavior as much as possible, refuse hypercalls made
> with the respective bits non-zero when the respective sub-ops don't
> make use of those bits.
> 
> Reported-by: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>

Acked-by: Tim Deegan <tim@xxxxxxx>

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