Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 12/20] xen/domctl: Merge max_vcpus into createdomain

2018-03-23 Thread Jan Beulich
>>> On 19.03.18 at 20:13, wrote: > @@ -551,6 +555,37 @@ long do_domctl(XEN_GUEST_HANDLE_PARAM(xen_domctl_t) > u_domctl) > if ( !ret ) > goto createdomain_fail_late; > > +ret = -EINVAL; > +if ( vcpus > domain_max_vcpus(d) ) > +

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 12/20] xen/domctl: Merge max_vcpus into createdomain

2018-03-21 Thread Wei Liu
On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 07:13:51PM +, Andrew Cooper wrote: > XEN_DOMCTL_max_vcpus is a mandatory hypercall, but nothing actually prevents a > toolstack from unpausing a domain with no vcpus. > > Originally, d->vcpus[] was an embedded array in struct domain, but c/s > fb442e217 "x86_64: allow

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 12/20] xen/domctl: Merge max_vcpus into createdomain

2018-03-20 Thread Christian Lindig
> On 19. Mar 2018, at 19:13, Andrew Cooper wrote: > > XEN_DOMCTL_max_vcpus is a mandatory hypercall, but nothing actually prevents a > toolstack from unpausing a domain with no vcpus. > > Originally, d->vcpus[] was an embedded array in struct domain, but c/s >

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 12/20] xen/domctl: Merge max_vcpus into createdomain

2018-03-20 Thread Daniel De Graaf
On 03/19/2018 03:13 PM, Andrew Cooper wrote: XEN_DOMCTL_max_vcpus is a mandatory hypercall, but nothing actually prevents a toolstack from unpausing a domain with no vcpus. Originally, d->vcpus[] was an embedded array in struct domain, but c/s fb442e217 "x86_64: allow more vCPU-s per guest" in