From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: George Dunlap <George.Dunlap@eu.citrix.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] libxl: passthrough: avoid passing through
 devices not owned by pciback
Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2012 09:07:01 +0100
Message-ID: <CAFLBxZaQ4kjadTbgX0DTPhcr-azLdA1om7Yth7G7adBW17dFLg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <403610A45A2B5242BD291EDAE8B37D300FCF23D7@SHSMSX102.ccr.corp.intel.com>
	<20345.56112.630128.747571@mariner.uk.xensource.com>
	<403610A45A2B5242BD291EDAE8B37D300FD0826A@SHSMSX102.ccr.corp.intel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
In-Reply-To: <403610A45A2B5242BD291EDAE8B37D300FD0826A@SHSMSX102.ccr.corp.intel.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
To: "Hao, Xudong" <xudong.hao@intel.com>
Cc: "Kay, Allen M" <allen.m.kay@intel.com>, "xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" <xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>, Ian Jackson <Ian.Jackson@eu.citrix.com>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On Thu, Apr 5, 2012 at 2:13 AM, Hao, Xudong <xudong.hao@intel.com> wrote:
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Ian Jackson [mailto:Ian.Jackson@eu.citrix.com]
>> Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2012 1:01 AM
>> To: Hao, Xudong
>> Cc: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com; Kay, Allen M
>> Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] libxl: passthrough: avoid passing through
>> devices not owned by pciback
>>
>> Hao, Xudong writes ("[Xen-devel] [PATCH] libxl: passthrough: avoid passing
>> through devices not owned by pciback"):
>> > <Porting from Xen 4.1 tree.>
>> >
>> > libxl: passthrough: avoid passing through devices not owned by pciback
>>
>> I'm afraid this no longer applies to xen-unstable.hg tip.
>>
> Reason?
>
> If no pciback checking, one device could be assigned to guest even it's being used by dom0, is there security issue?

I think Ian is saying that the actual patch itself doesn't apply. That is,

$ patch -p1 < passthru.diff

fails; so he's asking you to send a new version of the patch.

 -George