Wei Liu writes ("Re: [PATCH 10/22] xentoolcore_restrict_all: Implement for
libxenforeignmemory"):
> On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 12:08:27PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > Wei Liu writes ("Re: [PATCH 10/22] xentoolcore_restrict_all: Implement for
> > libxenforeignmemory"):
> > > Sure that's fine.
> >
>
On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 12:08:27PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Wei Liu writes ("Re: [PATCH 10/22] xentoolcore_restrict_all: Implement for
> libxenforeignmemory"):
> > Sure that's fine.
>
> I have this now:
>
> * If called again with the same domid, it may succeed, or it may
> * fail (even thou
Wei Liu writes ("Re: [PATCH 10/22] xentoolcore_restrict_all: Implement for
libxenforeignmemory"):
> Sure that's fine.
I have this now:
* If called again with the same domid, it may succeed, or it may
* fail (even though such a call is potentially meaningful).
* (If called again with a differe
On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 11:51:06AM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Wei Liu writes ("Re: [PATCH 10/22] xentoolcore_restrict_all: Implement for
> libxenforeignmemory"):
> > Same comment for xendevicemodel_restrict on idempotent applies here.
>
> Are you happy with me fixing this by changing the docs ra
Wei Liu writes ("Re: [PATCH 10/22] xentoolcore_restrict_all: Implement for
libxenforeignmemory"):
> Same comment for xendevicemodel_restrict on idempotent applies here.
Are you happy with me fixing this by changing the docs rather than the
code ?
Ian.
___
On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 07:48:47PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> +static int all_restrict_cb(Xentoolcore__Active_Handle *ah, uint32_t domid) {
> +xenforeignmemory_handle *fmem = CONTAINER_OF(ah, *fmem, tc_ah);
> +
> +if (fmem->fd < 0)
> +/* just in case */
> +return 0;
> +
> +
Signed-off-by: Ian Jackson
---
tools/Rules.mk | 2 +-
tools/libs/foreignmemory/Makefile | 4 ++--
tools/libs/foreignmemory/core.c | 15 +++
tools/libs/foreignmemory/private.h | 3 +++
tools/libs/foreignmemo
