On Wed, 2013-10-02 at 13:02 +0300, Gleb Natapov wrote: > Yes, I alluded to it in my email to Paul and Paolo asked also. How this > interface is disabled? Also hwrnd is MMIO in a host why guest needs to > use hypercall instead of emulating the device (in kernel or somewhere > else?).
Migration will have to be dealt with one way or another, I suppose we will indeed need a qemu fallback. As for why hypercall instead of MMIO, well, you'd have to ask the folks who wrote the PAPR spec :-) It's specified as a hypercall and implemented as such in pHyp (PowerVM). The existing guests expect it that way. It might have to do with the required whitening done by the hypervisor (H_RANDOM output is supposed to be clean). It also abstracts us from the underlying HW implementation which could in theory change. > Another things is that on a host hwrnd is protected from > direct userspace access by virtue of been a device, but guest code (event > kernel mode) is userspace as far as hosts security model goes, so by > implementing this hypercall in a way that directly access hwrnd you > expose hwrnd to a userspace unconditionally. Why is this a good idea? Why would this be a bad idea ? Ben. > -- > Gleb. > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm-ppc" in > the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
