qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 4/5] backdoor: [softmmu] Add QEMU-side proxy to


From: Frans de Boer
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 4/5] backdoor: [softmmu] Add QEMU-side proxy to "libbackdoor.a"
Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2011 00:35:24 +0200
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.22) Gecko/20110907 SUSE/3.1.14 Thunderbird/3.1.14

On 09/29/2011 11:49 PM, Lluís Vilanova wrote:
Blue Swirl writes:

2011/9/29 Lluís Vilanova<address@hidden>:
+static uint64_t control_io_read(void *opaque, target_phys_addr_t addr, 
unsigned size)
+{
+    State *s = opaque;
+
+    uint64_t res = ldq_p(&s->size);
+    uint8_t *resb = (uint8_t*)&res;
+    return resb[addr % CTRL_BYTES];

I don't think these lines do what you mean, but I'm also not sure what
it is supposed to mean.

Pre: only can read on a byte-per-byte basis (as stated in control_ops.impl),
just because the code looks less ugly, and host performance should not be an
issue here.

The device is treated as a circular buffer of length CTRL_BYTES

Reads are only used to get the size of the data channel.

First line should handle guest/host endianess swapping, although I'm not sure if
that's the API I'm supposed to use.

Then return the N'th byte of the uint64_t variable holding the (endianess-aware)
result.

+}
+
+static void control_io_write(void *opaque, target_phys_addr_t addr, uint64_t 
data, unsigned size)
+{
+    State *s = opaque;
+
+    uint8_t *cmdb = (uint8_t*)&s->cmd;
+    cmdb[addr % CTRL_BYTES] = (uint8_t)data;
+
+    if ((addr + size) % CTRL_BYTES == 0) {
+        qemu_backdoor(ldq_p(&s->cmd), s->data_ptr);
+    }

Same here.

Pre: same as during reads.

Accumulates writes into s->cmd to build the command the guest is sending us (in
guest endianess).

When CTRL_BYTES bytes have been written into the device, get the command value
into host endianess and invoke the user-provided backdoor callback.

This assumes that when executing in KVM, the device handling infrastructure will
get a lock and only one CPU will be sending a backdoor command until completion.


I'll add some comments there and prefix all structs and functions with
"backdoor_", as otherwise debugging could get harder if everyone started
avoiding the prefixes.


Lluis

I have not read the whole thread, but being an advisor in matters of information risk management, the very word "backdoor" send quivers along my spine. Why use a backdoor at all? The word alone gives us bad vibes.

Using these words will disseminate QEMU from professional use since a possible risk might be introduced (even if it seems documented). So, please clarify the word "backdoor" or change it into something less threatening.

regards,
Frans de Boer.



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]