Re: [Xen-devel] Device model operation hypercall (DMOP, re qemu depriv)

["Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

>>> On 13.09.16 at 18:07, <david.vrabel@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 12/09/16 15:32, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>>> On 09.09.16 at 17:16, <Jennifer.Herbert@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> The following code illustrates this idea:
>>>
>>> typedef struct dm_op_buffer {
>>>      XEN_GUEST_HANDLE(void) h;
>>>      size_t len;
>>> } dm_op_buffer_t;
>> 
>> This implies that we'll lose all type safety on the handles passed, as
>> is also emphasized by the use of raw_copy_from_guest() in the code
>> outline further down.
> 
> This is an direct result of the requirement that the privcmd driver does
> not know the types of the sub-ops themselves.  We can't have this
> requirement and type safety.  Which do we want?

Both, which the proposal utilizing side band information on VA
ranges allows for. (And in any event this to me clearly is an
aspect that would need to be mentioned in the disadvantages
section of the document.)

Jan


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