Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > linux.kernel > #1577658

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 3/3] xen/privcmd: add IOCTL_PRIVCMD_RESTRICT

From "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@suse.com>
Newsgroups linux.kernel
Subject Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 3/3] xen/privcmd: add IOCTL_PRIVCMD_RESTRICT
Date 2017-02-09 15:50 +0100
Message-ID <t8YcO-7mZ-21@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References <t8XJL-7cN-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <t8XJL-7cN-19@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw


>>> On 09.02.17 at 15:17, <paul.durrant@citrix.com> wrote:
> @@ -666,6 +680,20 @@ static long privcmd_ioctl_dm_op(void __user *udata)
>  	return rc;
>  }
>  
> +static long privcmd_ioctl_restrict(struct file *file, void __user *udata)
> +{
> +	struct privcmd_data *data = file->private_data;
> +	domid_t dom;
> +
> +	if (copy_from_user(&dom, udata, sizeof(dom)))
> +		return -EFAULT;
> +
> +	/* Set restriction to the specified domain */
> +	data->domid = dom;
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}

Is it really intended for the caller to be able to undo this, by passing
in DOMID_INVALID?

Jan

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

[PATCH 3/3] xen/privcmd: add IOCTL_PRIVCMD_RESTRICT Paul Durrant <paul.durrant@citrix.com> - 2017-02-09 15:20 +0100
  Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 3/3] xen/privcmd: add  IOCTL_PRIVCMD_RESTRICT "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@suse.com> - 2017-02-09 15:50 +0100
    RE: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 3/3] xen/privcmd: add IOCTL_PRIVCMD_RESTRICT Paul Durrant <Paul.Durrant@citrix.com> - 2017-02-09 15:50 +0100

csiph-web