On Tue, Oct 06, 2015 at 06:19:34PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 06, 2015 at 05:30:31PM +0300, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 06, 2015 at 05:19:22PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > > On Tue, Oct 06, 2015 at 11:33:56AM +0300, Vlad Zolotarov wrote:
> > > > the solution u pr
On 10/06/15 18:19, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Tue, Oct 06, 2015 at 05:30:31PM +0300, Gleb Natapov wrote:
On Tue, Oct 06, 2015 at 05:19:22PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Tue, Oct 06, 2015 at 11:33:56AM +0300, Vlad Zolotarov wrote:
the solution u propose should be a matter of a separa
On Tue, Oct 06, 2015 at 05:30:31PM +0300, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 06, 2015 at 05:19:22PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 06, 2015 at 11:33:56AM +0300, Vlad Zolotarov wrote:
> > > the solution u propose should be a matter of a separate patch and is
> > > obviously orthogon
On Tue, Oct 06, 2015 at 05:19:22PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 06, 2015 at 11:33:56AM +0300, Vlad Zolotarov wrote:
> > the solution u propose should be a matter of a separate patch and is
> > obviously orthogonal to this series.
>
> Doesn't work this way, sorry. You want a patch
On Tue, Oct 06, 2015 at 11:33:56AM +0300, Vlad Zolotarov wrote:
> the solution u propose should be a matter of a separate patch and is
> obviously orthogonal to this series.
Doesn't work this way, sorry. You want a patch enabling MSI merged,
you need to secure the MSI configuration.
And it's goin
On 10/06/15 01:29, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Tue, Oct 06, 2015 at 12:43:45AM +0300, Vladislav Zolotarov wrote:
So, like it has already been asked in a different thread I'm going to
ask a rhetorical question: what adding an MSI and MSI-X interrupts support to
uio_pci_generic has to do with s
On Tue, Oct 06, 2015 at 12:43:45AM +0300, Vladislav Zolotarov wrote:
> So, like it has already been asked in a different thread I'm going to
> ask a rhetorical question: what adding an MSI and MSI-X interrupts support to
> uio_pci_generic has to do with security?
memory protection is a better term
On Mon, Oct 05, 2015 at 01:36:35PM +0300, Vlad Zolotarov wrote:
> >And then there's the issue of why we even need this, why not just
> >write a whole new driver for this, like the previous driver did (which
> >also used ioctls, yes, I didn't have the chance to object to that before
> >everyone else
On 10/05/15 11:01, Greg KH wrote:
On Mon, Oct 05, 2015 at 10:33:20AM +0300, Vlad Zolotarov wrote:
On 10/05/15 06:03, Greg KH wrote:
On Sun, Oct 04, 2015 at 11:43:16PM +0300, Vlad Zolotarov wrote:
Signed-off-by: Vlad Zolotarov
---
drivers/uio/uio.c | 15 +++
include/l
On Mon, Oct 05, 2015 at 10:33:20AM +0300, Vlad Zolotarov wrote:
> On 10/05/15 06:03, Greg KH wrote:
> >On Sun, Oct 04, 2015 at 11:43:16PM +0300, Vlad Zolotarov wrote:
> >>Signed-off-by: Vlad Zolotarov
> >>---
> >> drivers/uio/uio.c | 15 +++
> >> include/linux/uio_driver.h |
On 10/05/15 06:03, Greg KH wrote:
On Sun, Oct 04, 2015 at 11:43:16PM +0300, Vlad Zolotarov wrote:
Signed-off-by: Vlad Zolotarov
---
drivers/uio/uio.c | 15 +++
include/linux/uio_driver.h | 3 +++
2 files changed, 18 insertions(+)
You add an ioctl yet fail to justif
On Sun, Oct 04, 2015 at 11:43:16PM +0300, Vlad Zolotarov wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Vlad Zolotarov
> ---
> drivers/uio/uio.c | 15 +++
> include/linux/uio_driver.h | 3 +++
> 2 files changed, 18 insertions(+)
You add an ioctl yet fail to justify _why_ you need/want that ioctl,
Signed-off-by: Vlad Zolotarov
---
drivers/uio/uio.c | 15 +++
include/linux/uio_driver.h | 3 +++
2 files changed, 18 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/uio/uio.c b/drivers/uio/uio.c
index 8196581..714b0e5 100644
--- a/drivers/uio/uio.c
+++ b/drivers/uio/uio.c
@@ -704,6 +70
Signed-off-by: Vlad Zolotarov
---
drivers/uio/uio.c | 15 +++
include/linux/uio_driver.h | 3 +++
2 files changed, 18 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/uio/uio.c b/drivers/uio/uio.c
index 8196581..714b0e5 100644
--- a/drivers/uio/uio.c
+++ b/drivers/uio/uio.c
@@ -704,6 +70
14 matches
Mail list logo
