On 02.05.2023 15:13, Daniel P. Smith wrote:
> On 5/2/23 07:00, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
>> On Tue, May 02, 2023 at 06:43:33AM -0400, Daniel P. Smith wrote:
>>> On 5/2/23 03:17, Jan Beulich wrote:
Unlike for XEN_DOMCTL_getdomaininfo, where the XSM check is intended to
cause the operation to
On 02.05.2023 14:54, Daniel P. Smith wrote:
> On 5/2/23 06:59, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 02.05.2023 12:43, Daniel P. Smith wrote:
>>> On 5/2/23 03:17, Jan Beulich wrote:
Unlike for XEN_DOMCTL_getdomaininfo, where the XSM check is intended to
cause the operation to fail, in the loop here
On 5/2/23 07:00, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
On Tue, May 02, 2023 at 06:43:33AM -0400, Daniel P. Smith wrote:
On 5/2/23 03:17, Jan Beulich wrote:
Unlike for XEN_DOMCTL_getdomaininfo, where the XSM check is intended to
cause the operation to fail, in the loop here it ought to merely
determine
On 5/2/23 06:59, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 02.05.2023 12:43, Daniel P. Smith wrote:
On 5/2/23 03:17, Jan Beulich wrote:
Unlike for XEN_DOMCTL_getdomaininfo, where the XSM check is intended to
cause the operation to fail, in the loop here it ought to merely
determine whether information for the
On Tue, May 02, 2023 at 06:43:33AM -0400, Daniel P. Smith wrote:
>
>
> On 5/2/23 03:17, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > Unlike for XEN_DOMCTL_getdomaininfo, where the XSM check is intended to
> > cause the operation to fail, in the loop here it ought to merely
> > determine whether information for the
On 02.05.2023 12:43, Daniel P. Smith wrote:
> On 5/2/23 03:17, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> Unlike for XEN_DOMCTL_getdomaininfo, where the XSM check is intended to
>> cause the operation to fail, in the loop here it ought to merely
>> determine whether information for the domain at hand may be reported
On 5/2/23 03:17, Jan Beulich wrote:
Unlike for XEN_DOMCTL_getdomaininfo, where the XSM check is intended to
cause the operation to fail, in the loop here it ought to merely
determine whether information for the domain at hand may be reported
back. Therefore if on the last iteration the hook
On 02.05.2023 11:33, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> On Tue, May 02, 2023 at 10:27:39AM +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>> On 02/05/2023 8:17 am, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>> The hook being able to deny access to data for certain domains means
>>> that no caller can assume to have a system-wide picture when
On 02/05/2023 10:33 am, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> On Tue, May 02, 2023 at 10:27:39AM +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>> On 02/05/2023 8:17 am, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>> The hook being able to deny access to data for certain domains means
>>> that no caller can assume to have a system-wide picture when
On Tue, May 02, 2023 at 10:27:39AM +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 02/05/2023 8:17 am, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > The hook being able to deny access to data for certain domains means
> > that no caller can assume to have a system-wide picture when holding the
> > results.
> >
> > Wouldn't it make
On 02/05/2023 8:17 am, Jan Beulich wrote:
> The hook being able to deny access to data for certain domains means
> that no caller can assume to have a system-wide picture when holding the
> results.
>
> Wouldn't it make sense to permit the function to merely "count" domains?
> While racy in
Unlike for XEN_DOMCTL_getdomaininfo, where the XSM check is intended to
cause the operation to fail, in the loop here it ought to merely
determine whether information for the domain at hand may be reported
back. Therefore if on the last iteration the hook results in denial,
this should not affect
12 matches
Mail list logo
