This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
Home Products Support Community News


Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH, v2] add privileged/unprivileged kernel feature i

To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@xxxxxxxxxx>, Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH, v2] add privileged/unprivileged kernel feature indication
From: Keir Fraser <keir@xxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2011 09:50:43 +0100
Cc: "xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Thu, 21 Jul 2011 01:52:06 -0700
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=sender:user-agent:date:subject:from:to:cc:message-id:thread-topic :thread-index:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=rWCDq7Csd/OGAVHgzGpHzZ6rBqYCzb6/gXyZApkZ/VQ=; b=FH8RtzTUv7MviDkm8tpPZGY56K4iiu9DfTxxwAfwpUoUH238XWe2+zXs8W7aAA4Ime gIbhMsqNlmBUuGnZLVX8odG1m5RSYrEbxPWf+nbtIIjn9rDexWl/ogI1dmqaO27a0QQC tc3SwuqDQTYsn70BMbvZgblDiKQZzjboQSxSA=
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <4E27FC7A020000780004EBE6@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thread-index: AcxHg0YkDQERG4zVDkWxfRuQ9b78XA==
Thread-topic: [Xen-devel] [PATCH, v2] add privileged/unprivileged kernel feature indication
User-agent: Microsoft-Entourage/
On 21/07/2011 09:16, "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>> You say it is a Linux notion that dom0 implies domU but I am not aware
>> of any PV OS which supports dom0 that doesn't also support domU, do you
>> have specific examples of OSes which are dom0-only?
> No, I'm not aware of any existing ones, but I also wasn't in favor of
> the move to imply unprivileged capabilities when Linux is configured
> as privileged guest (iirc this wasn't the case from the very beginning).
> And again, imo an interface like the hypervisor's shouldn't dictate any
> kind of policy on the guest OSes.

My own issue with the unprivileged flag is that I'm not clear what it
actually means. When would you *not* set it? I mean it looks in the Linux
side you set it unconditionally right now. What's the point? Why not remove
the flag and introduce it when we have good reason and can attach meaningful
semantics to it?

There we are, we're two against one now ;-)

 -- Keir

Xen-devel mailing list

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>