On Wed, 2007-08-15 at 12:46 +0900, Isaku Yamahata wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 14, 2007 at 09:48:00AM -0500, Hollis Blanchard wrote:
> > However, there are a few places below where you call memcpy() without
> > checking the result of xencomm_maddr_to_vaddr(). Actually, I see the
> > same issue in the original code in a few places... We should be very
> > very careful here, since a guest passing a bad paddr could result in Xen
> > overwriting 0x0.
> Thank you for comments. The next patch (3/7) addresses those issues.
> i.e. checking guest supplied values, avoiding races.
> I intentionally kept this patch(2/7) as small as possible leaving them
> to the next patch (3/7).

Ah, great.

> Since we can work around the populate physmap issue,
> it's ok for me to drop multi page support.
> But we need the next patch or something similar.
> If you dislike the implementation, I'm willing to refine it.
> Please suggest.

Patch 3 looks fine to me. I would like to give it a boot test first
though, and unfortunately I won't be able to do that today. I'll add my
signed-off line tomorrow after I've tried it.

Hollis Blanchard
IBM Linux Technology Center

Xen-ppc-devel mailing list

Reply via email to