Message ID | 20210325111255.16330-1-julien@xen.org (mailing list archive) |
---|---|
State | New, archived |
Headers | show |
Series | [for-4.15?] docs/design: Update xenstore-migration.md | expand |
On 25.03.21 12:12, Julien Grall wrote: > From: Julien Grall <jgrall@amazon.com> > > It is not very clear the shared page adddress is not contained in the > connection record. Additionally, it is misleading to say the grant > will always point to the share paged as a domain is free to revoke the > permission. The restore code would need to make sure it doesn't > fail/crash if this is happening. > > The sentence is now replaced with a paragraph explaining why the GFN is > not preserved and that the grant is not guarantee to exist during > restore. > > Take the opportunity to replace "code" with "node" when description the > permission. > > Reported-by: Raphael Ning <raphning@amazon.com> > Signed-off-by: Julien Grall <jgrall@amazon.com> Reviewed-by: Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com> Juergen
Julien Grall writes ("[PATCH for-4.15?] docs/design: Update xenstore-migration.md"): > From: Julien Grall <jgrall@amazon.com> > > It is not very clear the shared page adddress is not contained in the > connection record. Additionally, it is misleading to say the grant > will always point to the share paged as a domain is free to revoke the > permission. The restore code would need to make sure it doesn't > fail/crash if this is happening. > > The sentence is now replaced with a paragraph explaining why the GFN is > not preserved and that the grant is not guarantee to exist during > restore. > > Take the opportunity to replace "code" with "node" when description the > permission. > > Reported-by: Raphael Ning <raphning@amazon.com> > Signed-off-by: Julien Grall <jgrall@amazon.com> Release-Acked-by: Ian Jackson <iwj@xenproject.org>
Hi Ian, On 26/03/2021 12:06, Ian Jackson wrote: > Julien Grall writes ("[PATCH for-4.15?] docs/design: Update xenstore-migration.md"): >> From: Julien Grall <jgrall@amazon.com> >> >> It is not very clear the shared page adddress is not contained in the >> connection record. Additionally, it is misleading to say the grant >> will always point to the share paged as a domain is free to revoke the >> permission. The restore code would need to make sure it doesn't >> fail/crash if this is happening. >> >> The sentence is now replaced with a paragraph explaining why the GFN is >> not preserved and that the grant is not guarantee to exist during >> restore. >> >> Take the opportunity to replace "code" with "node" when description the >> permission. >> >> Reported-by: Raphael Ning <raphning@amazon.com> >> Signed-off-by: Julien Grall <jgrall@amazon.com> > > Release-Acked-by: Ian Jackson <iwj@xenproject.org> Thanks! I have committed the patch to staging and cherry-pick in staging-4.15. Cheers,
diff --git a/docs/designs/xenstore-migration.md b/docs/designs/xenstore-migration.md index 1a5b94b31da8..5f1155273ec3 100644 --- a/docs/designs/xenstore-migration.md +++ b/docs/designs/xenstore-migration.md @@ -216,8 +216,10 @@ For `shared ring` connections it is as follows: | | by xenstored to communicate with `domid` | | | | -Since the ABI guarantees that entry 1 in `domid`'s grant table will always -contain the GFN of the shared page. +The GFN of the shared page is not preserved because the ABI reserves +entry 1 in `domid`'s grant table to point to the xenstore shared page. +Note there is no guarantee the page will still be valid at the time of +the restore because a domain can revoke the permission. For `socket` connections it is as follows: @@ -398,7 +400,7 @@ A node permission specifier has the following format: | | | | `domid` | The domain-id to which the permission relates | -Note that perm1 defines the domain owning the code. See [4] for more +Note that perm1 defines the domain owning the node. See [4] for more explanation of node permissions. * * *