>>> On 09.11.17 at 15:42, <julien.gr...@linaro.org> wrote: > Hi, > > On 09/11/17 08:55, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>>> On 08.11.17 at 20:46, <chanud...@ainfosec.com> wrote: >>> Do it once at domain creation (hpet_init). >>> >>> Sleep -> Resume cycles will end up crashing an HVM guest with hpet as >>> the sequence during resume takes the path: >>> -> hvm_s3_suspend >>> -> hpet_reset >>> -> hpet_deinit >>> -> hpet_init >>> -> register_mmio_handler >>> -> hvm_next_io_handler >>> >>> register_mmio_handler will use a new io handler each time, until >>> eventually it reaches NR_IO_HANDLERS, then hvm_next_io_handler calls >>> domain_crash. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Eric Chanudet <chanud...@ainfosec.com> >>> >>> --- >>> v2: >>> * make hpet_reinit static inline (one call site in this file) >> >> Perhaps my prior reply was ambiguous: By "inlining" I meant >> literally inlining it (i.e. dropping the standalone function >> altogether). Static functions outside of header files should not >> normally be marked "inline" explicitly - it should be the compiler >> to make that decision. >> >> As doing the adjustment it relatively simple, I wouldn't mind >> doing so while committing, saving another round trip. With >> that adjustment (or at the very least with the "inline" dropped) >> Reviewed-by: Jan Beulich <jbeul...@suse.com> > > What would be the risk to get this patch in Xen 4.10?
Close to none, I would say. Of course, if there really was something wrong with the code restructuring to fix the bug, basically all HVM guests would be hosed HPET-wise. Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
