On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 10:10:22AM +1030, Rusty Russell wrote:
On Mon, 28 Nov 2011 11:15:31 +0200, Sasha Levin levinsasha...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Mon, 2011-11-28 at 11:25 +1030, Rusty Russell wrote:
I'd like to see kvmtools remove support for legacy mode altogether,
but they probably
Can this bug fix patch be applied yet?
With this bug, guest os cannot successfully boot with ioeventfd.
Thus the new PIO DoorBell patch cannot be posted.
Thanks,
Hongyong
于 2011/11/24,星期四 18:05, zanghongy...@huawei.com 写道:
From: Hongyong Zang zanghongy...@huawei.com
When a guest boots with
The 4-patch series to follow this email extends KVM-hypervisor and Linux guest
running on KVM-hypervisor to support pv-ticket spinlocks, based on Xen's
implementation.
One hypercall is introduced in KVM hypervisor,that allows a vcpu to kick
another vcpu out of halt state.
The blocking of vcpu
Add debugfs support to print u32-arrays in debugfs. Move the code from Xen to
debugfs
to make the code common for other users as well.
Signed-off-by: Srivatsa Vaddagiri va...@linux.vnet.ibm.com
Signed-off-by: Suzuki Poulose suz...@in.ibm.com
Signed-off-by: Raghavendra K T
Added configuration support to enable debug information
for KVM Guests in debugfs
Signed-off-by: Srivatsa Vaddagiri va...@linux.vnet.ibm.com
Signed-off-by: Suzuki Poulose suz...@in.ibm.com
Signed-off-by: Raghavendra K T raghavendra...@linux.vnet.ibm.com
---
diff --git a/arch/x86/Kconfig
This patch extends Linux guests running on KVM hypervisor to support
pv-ticketlocks.
During smp_boot_cpus paravirtualied KVM guest detects if the hypervisor has
required feature (KVM_FEATURE_KICK_VCPU) to support pv-ticketlocks. If so,
support for pv-ticketlocks is registered via pv_lock_ops.
Add a hypercall to KVM hypervisor to support pv-ticketlocks
KVM_HC_KICK_CPU allows the calling vcpu to kick another vcpu out of halt state.
The presence of these hypercalls is indicated to guest via
KVM_FEATURE_KICK_VCPU/KVM_CAP_KICK_VCPU.
Qemu needs a corresponding patch to pass up the
On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 04:59:51PM -0600, Anthony Liguori wrote:
On 11/29/2011 10:59 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 11/29/2011 05:51 PM, Juan Quintela wrote:
How to do high level stuff?
- python?
One of the disadvantages of the various scripting languages is the lack
of static type checking,
On 11/29/2011 06:02 PM, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 11/29/2011 05:56 AM, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
Subject: [PATCH v2 2/5] KVM: MMU: audit: replace mmu audit tracepoint with
jump-lable
The tracepoint is only used to audit mmu code, it should not be exposed to
user, let us replace it with jump-lable
On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 11:22:37AM +0200, Alon Levy wrote:
On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 04:59:51PM -0600, Anthony Liguori wrote:
On 11/29/2011 10:59 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 11/29/2011 05:51 PM, Juan Quintela wrote:
How to do high level stuff?
- python?
One of the disadvantages of the
On Tue, 29 Nov 2011, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Tuesday 29 November 2011, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
Hi all,
a few weeks ago I (and a few others) started hacking on a
proof-of-concept hypervisor port to Cortex-A15 which uses and requires
ARMv7 virtualization extensions. The intention of this
On Wed, 30 Nov 2011, Anup Patel wrote:
Hi all,
I wanted to know how Xen-ARM for A15 will address following concerns:
- How will Xen-ARM for A15 support legacy guest environment like ARMv5 or
ARMv6 ?
It is not our focus at the moment; we are targeting operating systems
that support a
On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 5:16 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin m...@redhat.com wrote:
This mentions iommu - is there a need to use dma api to let
the firmware acess the rings? Or does it have access to all
of memory?
IOMMU may or may not be used, it really depends on the hardware (my
personal SoC does
On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 5:19 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin m...@redhat.com wrote:
On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 03:57:19PM +0200, Ohad Ben-Cohen wrote:
Is an extra branch faster or slower than reverting d57ed95?
Sorry, unfortunately I have no way to measure this, as I don't have
any virtualization/x86
On Wednesday 30 November 2011, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Tue, 29 Nov 2011, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Tuesday 29 November 2011, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
Do you have a pointer to the kernel sources for the Linux guest?
We have very few changes to the Linux kernel at the moment (only 3
On Wed, 2011-11-30 at 10:10 +1030, Rusty Russell wrote:
On Mon, 28 Nov 2011 11:15:31 +0200, Sasha Levin levinsasha...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Mon, 2011-11-28 at 11:25 +1030, Rusty Russell wrote:
I'd like to see kvmtools remove support for legacy mode altogether,
but they probably have
On Wed, 2011-11-30 at 13:03 +, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Wednesday 30 November 2011, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Tue, 29 Nov 2011, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Tuesday 29 November 2011, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
Do you have a pointer to the kernel sources for the Linux guest?
We
On 11/30/2011 03:54 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 11:22:37AM +0200, Alon Levy wrote:
On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 04:59:51PM -0600, Anthony Liguori wrote:
On 11/29/2011 10:59 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 11/29/2011 05:51 PM, Juan Quintela wrote:
How to do high level stuff?
-
On 30 November 2011 11:39, Stefano Stabellini
stefano.stabell...@eu.citrix.com wrote:
A git branch is available here (not ready for submission):
git://xenbits.xen.org/people/sstabellini/linux-pvhvm.git arm
the branch above is based on git://linux-arm.org/linux-2.6.git arm-lpae,
even though
On Wed, 30 Nov 2011, Catalin Marinas wrote:
On 30 November 2011 11:39, Stefano Stabellini
stefano.stabell...@eu.citrix.com wrote:
A git branch is available here (not ready for submission):
git://xenbits.xen.org/people/sstabellini/linux-pvhvm.git arm
the branch above is based on
On Wednesday 30 November 2011, Ian Campbell wrote:
On Wed, 2011-11-30 at 13:03 +, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Wednesday 30 November 2011, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
This is the same choice people have made for KVM, but it's not
necessarily the best option in the long run. In particular, this
On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 07:54:30AM -0600, Anthony Liguori wrote:
[snip]
But the way we're structuring QOM, we could do very simple bindings
that just used introspection (much like GObject does).
Is this the current tree?
http://repo.or.cz/w/qemu/aliguori.git/tree/refs/heads/qom
The vast
On 11/30/2011 08:35 AM, Alon Levy wrote:
On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 07:54:30AM -0600, Anthony Liguori wrote:
[snip]
But the way we're structuring QOM, we could do very simple bindings
that just used introspection (much like GObject does).
Is this the current tree?
On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 01:55:53PM +0200, Ohad Ben-Cohen wrote:
On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 5:19 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin m...@redhat.com wrote:
On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 03:57:19PM +0200, Ohad Ben-Cohen wrote:
Is an extra branch faster or slower than reverting d57ed95?
Sorry, unfortunately I
On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 01:45:05PM +0200, Ohad Ben-Cohen wrote:
So you put virtio rings in MMIO memory?
I'll be precise: the vrings are created in non-cacheable memory, which
both processors have access to.
Could you please give a couple of examples of breakage?
Sure. Basically, the
On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 5:44 PM, Alex Williamson
alex.william...@redhat.com wrote:
On Tue, 2011-11-29 at 17:20 -0600, Stuart Yoder wrote:
BTW, github now has updated trees:
git://github.com/awilliam/linux-vfio.git vfio-next-2029
git://github.com/awilliam/qemu-vfio.git vfio-ng
Hi
On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 4:59 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin m...@redhat.com wrote:
I see. And this happens because the ARM processor reorders
memory writes
Yes.
And in an SMP configuration, writes are somehow not reordered?
They are, but then the smp memory barriers are enough to control these
On Tue, 2011-11-29 at 16:58 +0200, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 11/29/2011 04:54 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
Which is actually strange, weren't indirect buffers introduced to make
the performance *better*? From what I see it's pretty much the
same/worse for virtio-blk.
I know they were
On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 06:04:56PM +0200, Ohad Ben-Cohen wrote:
On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 4:59 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin m...@redhat.com wrote:
I see. And this happens because the ARM processor reorders
memory writes
Yes.
And in an SMP configuration, writes are somehow not reordered?
Sorry, I forgot to copy-paste one of the results :)
On Wed, 2011-11-30 at 18:11 +0200, Sasha Levin wrote:
I did some testing of indirect descriptors under different workloads.
All tests were on a 2 vcpu guest with vhost on. Simple TCP_STREAM using
netperf.
Indirect desc off:
guest -
On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 07:34:37PM +0100, Alexander Graf wrote:
On 11/23/2011 04:03 PM, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
Hi!
In my view the trouble of the numa hard bindings is not the fact
they're hard and qemu has to also decide the location (in fact it
doesn't need to decide the location if you
On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 6:15 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin m...@redhat.com wrote:
How are the rings mapped? normal memory, right?
No, device memory.
We allocate them with plan alloc_pages_exact in virtio_pci.c ...
I'm not using virtio_pci.c; remoteproc is allocating the rings using
the DMA API.
On Wed, 2011-11-30 at 21:52 +0530, Dipankar Sarma wrote:
Also, if at all topology changes due to migration or host kernel decisions,
we can make use of something like VPHN (virtual processor home node)
capability on Power systems to have guest kernel update its topology
knowledge. You can
On Wed, 2011-11-30 at 14:32 +, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Wednesday 30 November 2011, Ian Campbell wrote:
On Wed, 2011-11-30 at 13:03 +, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
For domU the DT would presumably be constructed by the toolstack (in
dom0 userspace) as appropriate for the guest configuration.
* Peter Zijlstra (a.p.zijls...@chello.nl) wrote:
On Wed, 2011-11-30 at 21:52 +0530, Dipankar Sarma wrote:
Also, if at all topology changes due to migration or host kernel decisions,
we can make use of something like VPHN (virtual processor home node)
capability on Power systems to have
On Wed, 2011-11-30 at 09:41 -0600, Stuart Yoder wrote:
On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 5:44 PM, Alex Williamson
alex.william...@redhat.com wrote:
On Tue, 2011-11-29 at 17:20 -0600, Stuart Yoder wrote:
BTW, github now has updated trees:
git://github.com/awilliam/linux-vfio.git
On 11/29/2011 9:19 AM, Ben Hutchings wrote:
On Tue, 2011-11-29 at 16:35 +, Ben Hutchings wrote:
Maybe I missed something!
Let's be clear on what our models are for filtering. At the moment we
have MAC filters set through ndo_set_rx_mode and VF filters set through
ndo_set_vf_{mac,vlan}.
On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 09:52:37PM +0530, Dipankar Sarma wrote:
create the guest topology correctly and optimize for NUMA. This
would work for us.
Even on the case of 1 guest that fits in one node, you're not going to
max out the full bandwidth of all memory channels with this.
qemu all can do
On Wednesday 30 November 2011, Ian Campbell wrote:
On Wed, 2011-11-30 at 14:32 +, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Wednesday 30 November 2011, Ian Campbell wrote:
What I suggested to the KVM developers is to start out with the
vexpress platform, but then generalize it to the point where it fits
On Wed, 30 Nov 2011, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
In principal we could also offer the user options as to which particular
platform a guest looks like.
At least when using a qemu based simulation. Most platforms have some
characteristics that are not meaningful in a classic virtualization
On Wed, 2011-11-30 at 09:34 -0800, Greg Rose wrote:
On 11/29/2011 9:19 AM, Ben Hutchings wrote:
On Tue, 2011-11-29 at 16:35 +, Ben Hutchings wrote:
Maybe I missed something!
[...]
If not, please explain what the new model *is*.
The new model is to incorporate a VEB into the NIC.
On 11/29/2011 9:29 PM, Matt Graham wrote:
Hello,
Can a guest with SDL graphics run on a host without X? I get an error:
init kbd.
Could not initialize SDL - exiting
The above happens on a host with X after running /etc/init.d/xdm stop and chmod
-R 777 /dev.
If I don't do the chmod, SDL
* Ben Hutchings (bhutchi...@solarflare.com) wrote:
On Wed, 2011-11-30 at 09:34 -0800, Greg Rose wrote:
On 11/29/2011 9:19 AM, Ben Hutchings wrote:
On Tue, 2011-11-29 at 16:35 +, Ben Hutchings wrote:
Maybe I missed something!
[...]
If not, please explain what the new model *is*.
As while loops termination conditions are checked at
the beginning of the loop, if we successfuly log onto
the vm on the last cycle, but the timeout happened
to be ended by then, we'd have a test failure.
So, introduce a variable that records whether the
test managed to log onto the VM, and use
Print total time elapsed and number of save/load
VM cycles performed during the test. Also, verify whether
a kernel panic happened during the test execution.
Signed-off-by: Lucas Meneghel Rodrigues l...@redhat.com
---
client/tests/kvm/tests/boot_savevm.py | 23 +--
1 files
This way we'll have much more stress by doing more save/load
cycles during boot time. We did see some disk corruption problems
using this value, but the condition is not 100% reproducible.
Signed-off-by: Lucas Meneghel Rodrigues l...@redhat.com
---
client/tests/kvm/subtests.cfg.sample |2 +-
Under some conditions, monitor screendumps can get truncated,
generating IOError exceptions during PIL conversion. So
handle those errors and log a warning rather than failing
the entire screendump thread.
Signed-off-by: Lucas Meneghel Rodrigues l...@redhat.com
---
On Wed, 2011-11-30 at 13:04 -0800, Chris Wright wrote:
* Ben Hutchings (bhutchi...@solarflare.com) wrote:
On Wed, 2011-11-30 at 09:34 -0800, Greg Rose wrote:
On 11/29/2011 9:19 AM, Ben Hutchings wrote:
On Tue, 2011-11-29 at 16:35 +, Ben Hutchings wrote:
Maybe I missed
2011/11/30 Zang Hongyong zanghongy...@huawei.com:
Can this bug fix patch be applied yet?
Sorry, for not replying yet. I'll test your patch within the next day.
With this bug, guest os cannot successfully boot with ioeventfd.
Thus the new PIO DoorBell patch cannot be posted.
Well, you can
On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 4:50 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin m...@redhat.com wrote:
make headers_install
make -C tools/virtio/
(you'll need an empty stub for tools/virtio/linux/module.h,
I just sent a patch to add that)
sudo insmod tools/virtio/vhost_test/vhost_test.ko
./tools/virtio/virtio_test
* Ben Hutchings (bhutchi...@solarflare.com) wrote:
On Wed, 2011-11-30 at 13:04 -0800, Chris Wright wrote:
I agree that it's confusing. Couldn't you simplify your ascii art
(hopefully removing hw assumptions about receive processing, and
completely ignoring vlans for the moment) to
On Thu, Dec 01, 2011 at 12:43:08AM +0200, Ohad Ben-Cohen wrote:
On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 4:50 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin m...@redhat.com wrote:
make headers_install
make -C tools/virtio/
(you'll need an empty stub for tools/virtio/linux/module.h,
I just sent a patch to add that)
sudo insmod
-Original Message-
From: Chris Wright [mailto:chr...@redhat.com]
Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2011 3:01 PM
To: Ben Hutchings
Cc: Chris Wright; Rose, Gregory V; Roopa Prabhu; net...@vger.kernel.org;
da...@davemloft.net; s...@us.ibm.com; dragos.tatu...@gmail.com;
kvm@vger.kernel.org;
On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 6:24 PM, Ohad Ben-Cohen o...@wizery.com wrote:
On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 6:15 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin m...@redhat.com wrote:
How are the rings mapped? normal memory, right?
No, device memory.
Ok, I have more info.
Originally remoteproc was mapping the rings using
On 11/30/2011 3:00 PM, Chris Wright wrote:
* Ben Hutchings (bhutchi...@solarflare.com) wrote:
On Wed, 2011-11-30 at 13:04 -0800, Chris Wright wrote:
I agree that it's confusing. Couldn't you simplify your ascii art
(hopefully removing hw assumptions about receive processing, and
completely
* Sridhar Samudrala (s...@us.ibm.com) wrote:
On 11/30/2011 3:00 PM, Chris Wright wrote:
physical port
|
+++
| +-+ |
| | VEB | |
| +-+ |
|/ | \|
| /|\
On Thu, Dec 01, 2011 at 01:27:10AM +0200, Ohad Ben-Cohen wrote:
On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 6:24 PM, Ohad Ben-Cohen o...@wizery.com wrote:
On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 6:15 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin m...@redhat.com wrote:
How are the rings mapped? normal memory, right?
No, device memory.
Ok, I
On Mon, 28 Nov 2011 23:05:21 +0200, Sasha Levin levinsasha...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, 2011-11-28 at 22:17 +0200, Sasha Levin wrote:
btw, on an unrelated subject, I think that with this patch we've fully
covered the virtio spec, and as far as I know it's the first userspace
implementation
On Wed, 30 Nov 2011 18:11:51 +0200, Sasha Levin levinsasha...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, 2011-11-29 at 16:58 +0200, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 11/29/2011 04:54 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
Which is actually strange, weren't indirect buffers introduced to make
the performance *better*?
On Wed, 30 Nov 2011 15:12:43 +0200, Sasha Levin levinsasha...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, 2011-11-30 at 10:10 +1030, Rusty Russell wrote:
On Mon, 28 Nov 2011 11:15:31 +0200, Sasha Levin levinsasha...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Mon, 2011-11-28 at 11:25 +1030, Rusty Russell wrote:
I'd like to see
On Thu, 1 Dec 2011 01:13:07 +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin m...@redhat.com wrote:
For x86, stores into memory are ordered. So I think that yes, smp_XXX
can be selected at compile time.
So let's forget the virtio strangeness for a minute,
Hmm, we got away with light barriers because we knew we
On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 1:13 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin m...@redhat.com wrote:
For x86, stores into memory are ordered. So I think that yes, smp_XXX
can be selected at compile time.
But then you can't use the same kernel image for both scenarios.
It won't take long until people will use virtio on
On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 1:43 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin m...@redhat.com wrote:
And these accesses need to be ordered with DSB? Or DMB?
DMB (i.e. smp barriers) should be enough within Normal memory
accesses, though the other issues that were reported to me are a bit
concerning. I'm still trying to get
On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 4:28 AM, Rusty Russell ru...@rustcorp.com.au wrote:
Hmm, we got away with light barriers because we knew we were not
*really* talking to a device. But now with virtio-mmio, turns out we
are :)
I'm really tempted to revert d57ed95 for 3.2, and we can revisit this
On Thu, Dec 01, 2011 at 01:12:25PM +1030, Rusty Russell wrote:
On Wed, 30 Nov 2011 18:11:51 +0200, Sasha Levin levinsasha...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Tue, 2011-11-29 at 16:58 +0200, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 11/29/2011 04:54 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
Which is actually strange, weren't
65 matches
Mail list logo
