Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen: Restore p2m_access_t enum order to allow bitmask semantics

2016-03-14 Thread George Dunlap
On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 8:53 AM, Malcolm Crossley wrote: > On 10/03/16 20:48, Tamas K Lengyel wrote: >> >> >> On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 5:30 PM, George Dunlap > > wrote: >> >> On 08/03/16 15:30, Malcolm

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen: Restore p2m_access_t enum order to allow bitmask semantics

2016-03-11 Thread Malcolm Crossley
On 10/03/16 20:48, Tamas K Lengyel wrote: > > > On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 5:30 PM, George Dunlap > wrote: > > On 08/03/16 15:30, Malcolm Crossley wrote: > > Nested hap code assumed implict bitmask semantics of the p2m_access_t >

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen: Restore p2m_access_t enum order to allow bitmask semantics

2016-03-10 Thread Tamas K Lengyel
On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 5:30 PM, George Dunlap wrote: > On 08/03/16 15:30, Malcolm Crossley wrote: > > Nested hap code assumed implict bitmask semantics of the p2m_access_t > > enum prior to C/S 4c63692d7c38c5ac414fe97f8ef37b66e05abe5c > > > > The change to the enum

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen: Restore p2m_access_t enum order to allow bitmask semantics

2016-03-09 Thread George Dunlap
On 08/03/16 15:30, Malcolm Crossley wrote: > Nested hap code assumed implict bitmask semantics of the p2m_access_t > enum prior to C/S 4c63692d7c38c5ac414fe97f8ef37b66e05abe5c > > The change to the enum ordering broke this assumption and caused functional > problems for the nested hap code. As it

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen: Restore p2m_access_t enum order to allow bitmask semantics

2016-03-08 Thread Tamas K Lengyel
On Tue, Mar 8, 2016 at 4:52 PM, Jan Beulich wrote: > >>> On 08.03.16 at 16:30, wrote: > > Nested hap code assumed implict bitmask semantics of the p2m_access_t > > enum prior to C/S 4c63692d7c38c5ac414fe97f8ef37b66e05abe5c > > > > The change to

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen: Restore p2m_access_t enum order to allow bitmask semantics

2016-03-08 Thread Jan Beulich
>>> On 08.03.16 at 16:30, wrote: > Nested hap code assumed implict bitmask semantics of the p2m_access_t > enum prior to C/S 4c63692d7c38c5ac414fe97f8ef37b66e05abe5c > > The change to the enum ordering broke this assumption and caused functional > problems for the

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen: Restore p2m_access_t enum order to allow bitmask semantics

2016-03-08 Thread Andrew Cooper
On 08/03/16 15:30, Malcolm Crossley wrote: > Nested hap code assumed implict bitmask semantics of the p2m_access_t > enum prior to C/S 4c63692d7c38c5ac414fe97f8ef37b66e05abe5c > > The change to the enum ordering broke this assumption and caused functional > problems for the nested hap code. As it

[Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen: Restore p2m_access_t enum order to allow bitmask semantics

2016-03-08 Thread Malcolm Crossley
Nested hap code assumed implict bitmask semantics of the p2m_access_t enum prior to C/S 4c63692d7c38c5ac414fe97f8ef37b66e05abe5c The change to the enum ordering broke this assumption and caused functional problems for the nested hap code. As it may be error prone to audit and find all other