From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.6 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6464DC433E0 for ; Tue, 2 Jun 2020 13:10:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.xenproject.org (lists.xenproject.org [192.237.175.120]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2A89E20674 for ; Tue, 2 Jun 2020 13:10:57 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key) header.d=tklengyel-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.i=@tklengyel-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.b="o4VCA6Z6" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 2A89E20674 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=tklengyel.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=xen-devel-bounces@lists.xenproject.org Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.xenproject.org) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1jg6gq-00058n-3g; Tue, 02 Jun 2020 13:10:48 +0000 Received: from us1-rack-iad1.inumbo.com ([172.99.69.81]) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1jg6go-00058d-LE for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Tue, 02 Jun 2020 13:10:46 +0000 X-Inumbo-ID: 78445cb0-a4d2-11ea-8993-bc764e2007e4 Received: from mail-ed1-x541.google.com (unknown [2a00:1450:4864:20::541]) by us1-rack-iad1.inumbo.com (Halon) with ESMTPS id 78445cb0-a4d2-11ea-8993-bc764e2007e4; Tue, 02 Jun 2020 13:10:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ed1-x541.google.com with SMTP id k19so10011428edv.9 for ; Tue, 02 Jun 2020 06:10:46 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=tklengyel-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=fh1MChi4ucV0aKbtrjKRJQeQqvw0jax4gFsFyQpw5wo=; b=o4VCA6Z6cQjY+4Fu8+4LnJlrzSiNCqW4PWTyKlInMymg3r+5askL3jrX/yEgj73iUI zWUCcSnpzkoDCbPf5Fz+uVUFsmUyYMlblia7PNcn86c+5fLF7UBB1DS5wj0CQjPqgQBD 8E6lx9LheX99M5SefzMstyux/BnXvbH7f7PT6r/78mBvBNTdZv4OB+4TcR6cjUSdOiTw 0kgG81fz35iKjqXlcvuU1vDZrMwNeMqXKJv27I3mbq7gOjQ0XhR5x3d3zksb0qKRdLcJ kOVbtGPmKjIzWnwqNbGSs4yjzKdY+7YKznpI/+dyGQbRnOrT2VNJ0RkBZr2XIWUQD645 wzRQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=fh1MChi4ucV0aKbtrjKRJQeQqvw0jax4gFsFyQpw5wo=; b=g+bzGQgFaBWZrJA9SrDMVffrHxdecCO+z1Xa92wOeViAJki4DDWN0gJ6hcV+DIwRe9 5QIZk+CoX9vwl1+K+dmObstSzAXGVf/+Q9Ap3pezxiJAaxFpr+Ekbmlg3152mHmuBeTV G+HGcLM1AAghGLv9aIxlMPbwHKclV+Htygrw33P1yefSl/VvgyaxfsYGvtKboQC8JL9D UEbqS7KqJOlUU4dZ3jPyDcb4TrXKC6RR/03cXOsI3Zc/Cj1NtreLm2ISschDRgVgCzsX YcpVBqR34Br0WHnWcSf2i8KpCRRDmSFI3KUR8SiBeqG1GT6mSpO6ztlFNaFx0lWi2rrb 1foQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530JbG/1Z29NhlE8WmqXwELzubDv9IVMntkX9XmOMwsr48B0npvZ CVGCh/ijhAoo5lBm52B7P7AsWcRVK14= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzjQX4CGB30tzJgq7PlowZEqxaBkH2/tr0S6isMimsdh52oPF7OohzhzfZRarDlSWCiSqfD0w== X-Received: by 2002:aa7:d613:: with SMTP id c19mr13542036edr.321.1591103444849; Tue, 02 Jun 2020 06:10:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-wm1-f42.google.com (mail-wm1-f42.google.com. [209.85.128.42]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id z3sm1659543ejl.38.2020.06.02.06.10.44 for (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 02 Jun 2020 06:10:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-wm1-f42.google.com with SMTP id c71so2860705wmd.5 for ; Tue, 02 Jun 2020 06:10:44 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 2002:a1c:1b13:: with SMTP id b19mr4019032wmb.84.1591103443840; Tue, 02 Jun 2020 06:10:43 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20200602110223.GW1195@Air-de-Roger> In-Reply-To: From: Tamas K Lengyel Date: Tue, 2 Jun 2020 07:10:07 -0600 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 for-4.14 1/3] xen/monitor: Control register values To: Jan Beulich Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-BeenThere: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Xen developer discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Petre Pircalabu , Stefano Stabellini , Julien Grall , Wei Liu , Andrew Cooper , Ian Jackson , George Dunlap , Alexandru Isaila , Xen-devel , =?UTF-8?Q?Roger_Pau_Monn=C3=A9?= Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xenproject.org Sender: "Xen-devel" On Tue, Jun 2, 2020 at 7:00 AM Jan Beulich wrote: > > On 02.06.2020 14:51, Tamas K Lengyel wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 2, 2020 at 6:47 AM Jan Beulich wrote: > >> > >> On 02.06.2020 14:40, Tamas K Lengyel wrote: > >>> On Tue, Jun 2, 2020 at 5:08 AM Roger Pau Monn=C3=A9 wrote: > >>>> > >>>> On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 08:31:52PM -0600, Tamas K Lengyel wrote: > >>>>> Extend the monitor_op domctl to include option that enables > >>>>> controlling what values certain registers are permitted to hold > >>>>> by a monitor subscriber. > >>>> > >>>> I think the change could benefit for some more detail commit message > >>>> here. Why is this useful? > >>> > >>> You would have to ask the Bitdefender folks who made the feature. I > >>> don't use it. Here we are just making it optional as it is buggy so i= t > >>> is disabled by default. > >> > >> Now that's exactly the opposite of what I had derived from the > >> description here so far. Perhaps an at least weak indication > >> that you want to reword this. For example, from your reply to > >> Roger I understand it's rather that the new flag allows to > >> "suppress" the controlling (since presumably you don't change > >> default behavior), rather then "enabling" it. > > > > What we are adding is a domctl you need to call that enables this > > feature. It's not an option to suppress it. It shouldn't have been > > enabled by default to begin with. That was a mistake when the feature > > was contributed and it is buggy. > > Okay, in this case it's important to point out that you alter > default behavior. The BitDefender folks may not like this, yet > they've been surprisingly silent so far. Well, it was Bitdefender who altered the default behavior. We are reverting their mistake and making it optional. But I can certainly make that more clear. Tamas