Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v8 1/8] xen: xsm: flask: introduce XENMAPSPACE_gmfn_share for memory sharing

["Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

>>> On 06.11.18 at 23:42, <sstabellini@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Oct 2018, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> >>> On 09.10.18 at 01:37, <sstabellini@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > --- a/xen/include/xsm/dummy.h
>> > +++ b/xen/include/xsm/dummy.h
>> > @@ -535,6 +535,20 @@ static XSM_INLINE int 
>> > xsm_map_gmfn_foreign(XSM_DEFAULT_ARG struct domain *d, str
>> >      return xsm_default_action(action, d, t);
>> >  }
>> >  
>> > +/*
>> > + * Be aware that this is not an exact default equivalence of its flask
>> > + * variant which also checks if @d and @t "are allowed to share memory
>> > + * pages", for now, we don't have a proper default equivalence of such a
>> > + * check.
>> > + */
>> > +static XSM_INLINE int xsm_map_gmfn_share(XSM_DEFAULT_ARG struct domain *d,
>> > +                                         struct domain *t)
>> > +{
>> > +    XSM_ASSERT_ACTION(XSM_TARGET);
>> > +    return xsm_default_action(XSM_TARGET, current->domain, d) ?:
>> > +           xsm_default_action(action, current->domain, t);
>> > +}
>> 
>> Does this (specifically xsm/dummy.c)) build with XSM enabled?
>> Afaict "action" is going to be an undefined symbol in that case.
> 
> I tried it and it does build OK

Oh, I see - that because of the way XSM_ASSERT_ACTION() is
defined in that case. It's in fact the other way around: For
consistency with other code, you shouldn't use literal
XSM_TARGET in the first function invocation.

Jan



_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel