> >> Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2015 12:59 AM
> >> To: xen-devel
> >> Cc: George Dunlap; Andrew Cooper; Tian, Kevin; Keir Fraser; Nakajima, Jun
> >> Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/3] x86/p2m: tighten conditions of IOMMU
> >> mapping updates
> >
George Dunlap; Andrew Cooper; Tian, Kevin; Keir Fraser; Nakajima, Jun
>> Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/3] x86/p2m: tighten conditions of IOMMU
>> mapping updates
>>
>> >>> On 21.09.15 at 16:02, wrote:
>> > In the EPT case permission changes should
gt; Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/3] x86/p2m: tighten conditions of IOMMU
> mapping updates
>
> >>> On 21.09.15 at 16:02, wrote:
> > In the EPT case permission changes should also result in updates or
> > TLB flushes.
> >
> > In the NPT case the old MFN
On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 04:47:00AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 23.09.15 at 16:00, wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 08:15:39AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >> >>> On 21.09.15 at 16:02, wrote:
> >> > In the EPT case permission changes should also result in updates or
> >> > TLB flushes.
> >
>>> On 23.09.15 at 16:00, wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 08:15:39AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> >>> On 21.09.15 at 16:02, wrote:
>> > In the EPT case permission changes should also result in updates or
>> > TLB flushes.
>> >
>> > In the NPT case the old MFN does not depend on the new entry be
>>> On 21.09.15 at 16:02, wrote:
> In the EPT case permission changes should also result in updates or
> TLB flushes.
>
> In the NPT case the old MFN does not depend on the new entry being
> valid (but solely on the old one), and the need to update or TLB-flush
> again also depends on permission
>>> On 28.09.15 at 18:32, wrote:
> On 21/09/15 15:02, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> In the EPT case permission changes should also result in updates or
>> TLB flushes.
>>
>> In the NPT case the old MFN does not depend on the new entry being
>> valid (but solely on the old one), and the need to update or
On 28/09/15 17:32, George Dunlap wrote:
> On 21/09/15 15:02, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> In the EPT case permission changes should also result in updates or
>> TLB flushes.
>>
>> In the NPT case the old MFN does not depend on the new entry being
>> valid (but solely on the old one), and the need to updat
On 21/09/15 15:02, Jan Beulich wrote:
> In the EPT case permission changes should also result in updates or
> TLB flushes.
>
> In the NPT case the old MFN does not depend on the new entry being
> valid (but solely on the old one), and the need to update or TLB-flush
> again also depends on permiss
>>> On 28.09.15 at 11:06, wrote:
On 28.09.15 at 10:55, wrote:
>> Acked-by: Kevin Tian
>
> Thanks, but quite a bit more important would have been a reply
> to this
>
>>>In addition to the fixes here it looks to me as if both EPT and
>>>NPT/shadow code lack invalidation of IOMMU side paging
>>> On 28.09.15 at 10:55, wrote:
>> From: Jan Beulich [mailto:jbeul...@suse.com]
>> Sent: Monday, September 21, 2015 10:03 PM
>>
>> In the EPT case permission changes should also result in updates or
>> TLB flushes.
>>
>> In the NPT case the old MFN does not depend on the new entry being
>> val
> From: Jan Beulich [mailto:jbeul...@suse.com]
> Sent: Monday, September 21, 2015 10:03 PM
>
> In the EPT case permission changes should also result in updates or
> TLB flushes.
>
> In the NPT case the old MFN does not depend on the new entry being
> valid (but solely on the old one), and the nee
>>> On 21.09.15 at 16:02, wrote:
> In the EPT case permission changes should also result in updates or
> TLB flushes.
>
> In the NPT case the old MFN does not depend on the new entry being
> valid (but solely on the old one), and the need to update or TLB-flush
> again also depends on permission
On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 08:15:39AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 21.09.15 at 16:02, wrote:
> > In the EPT case permission changes should also result in updates or
> > TLB flushes.
> >
> > In the NPT case the old MFN does not depend on the new entry being
> > valid (but solely on the old one)
>>> On 21.09.15 at 16:02, wrote:
> In the EPT case permission changes should also result in updates or
> TLB flushes.
>
> In the NPT case the old MFN does not depend on the new entry being
> valid (but solely on the old one), and the need to update or TLB-flush
> again also depends on permission
In the EPT case permission changes should also result in updates or
TLB flushes.
In the NPT case the old MFN does not depend on the new entry being
valid (but solely on the old one), and the need to update or TLB-flush
again also depends on permission changes.
In the shadow mode case, iommu_hap_p
16 matches
Mail list logo
