Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 2/2] xen/x86: hap: Clean-up and harden hap_enable()

[Julien Grall <jgrall@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On 04/02/2020 11:28, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 04, 2020 at 11:11:11AM +0000, Julien Grall wrote:
> > On 04/02/2020 10:51, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> > > On Tue, Feb 04, 2020 at 09:34:11AM +0000, Julien Grall wrote:
> > > > From: Julien Grall <jgrall@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > >
> > > > Unlike shadow_enable(), hap_enable() can only be called once during
> > > > domain creation and with the mode equal to mode equal to
> > >                                       ^ equals to
> > Will fix it.
> >
> > > > PG_external | PG_translate | PG_refcounts.
> > > >
> > > > If it were called twice, then we might have something interesting
> > >                                                 ^ a problem
> > > > problem as the p2m tables would be re-allocated (and therefore all the
> > > > mappings would be lost).
> > > >
> > > > Add code to sanity check the mode and that the function is only called
> > > > once. Take the opportunity to an if checking that PG_translate is set.
> > >                                   ^ add an if
> > Will fix it.
> >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Julien Grall <jgrall@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > >
> > > > ---
> > > >
> > > > It is not entirely clear when PG_translate was enforced.
> > > > ---
> > > >    xen/arch/x86/mm/hap/hap.c | 18 +++++++++++-------
> > > >    1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/mm/hap/hap.c b/xen/arch/x86/mm/hap/hap.c
> > > > index 31362a31b6..b734e2e6d3 100644
> > > > --- a/xen/arch/x86/mm/hap/hap.c
> > > > +++ b/xen/arch/x86/mm/hap/hap.c
> > > > @@ -445,6 +445,13 @@ int hap_enable(struct domain *d, u32 mode)
> > > >        unsigned int i;
> > > >        int rv = 0;
> > > > +    if ( mode != (PG_external | PG_translate | PG_refcounts) )
> > > > +        return -EINVAL;
> > > > +
> > > > +    /* The function can only be called once */
> > > > +    if ( d->arch.paging.mode != 0 )
> > > > +        return -EINVAL;
> > > If you want to return EINVAL for both they can be merged into a single
> > > if. Also note that this would usually be written as
> > > if ( d->arch.paging.mode ) to keep it shorter.
> > To be honest, this is a matter of taste. There is also an argument that for
> > MISRA, your suggestion is not compliant (see Rule 14.4).
> Oh, then we should add those rules to CODING_STYLE if they are to be
> enforced.
I am not looking to enforce anything at the moment. My main point here 
is this is pretty much as matter of taste. But there might be concern 
with your suggestion if go forward with MISRA (this is not the only one 
though ;)).
> So far the style of most of the hypervisor code is to omit the value
> when comparing against 0 or NULL AFAIK.
>
> I don't have an issue with requiring explicit comparisons, but it
> needs to be documented so we can aim to have an homogeneous style,
> because so far I've been recommending the other way around.
Aside the MISRA, there are some cases where I feel the explicit 
comparisons make sense. But I don't have any rational for them and view 
this as a matter of taste. So I would leave it to the author of the 
patch the choice.
Cheers,

--
Julien Grall

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