On 04/04/2012 05:32 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 09:12:38PM +1030, Rusty Russell wrote:
Michael S. Tsirkin noticed that we could run the refill work after
ndo_close, which can re-enable napi - we don't disable it until
virtnet_remove. This is clearly wrong, so
On 2012-04-05 05:42, Alex Williamson wrote:
We've hit a kernel host panic, when issuing a 'system_reset' with an
82576 nic assigned and a Windows guest. Host system is a PowerEdge R815.
[Hardware Error]: Hardware error from APEI Generic Hardware Error Source:
32993
[Hardware Error]: APEI
We have an Hylafax 5.2.5 CentOS 5 installation hosted inside a Xen virtual
machine. It works quite well, but now I'm in the process of
upgrading/migrating it to a KVM virtual machine running Ubuntu 10.04.
The problem I'm having is that - while receiving works fine - sending faxes
is extremely
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=42636
--- Comment #9 from Klaus Mueller kmuel...@justmail.de 2012-04-05 08:08:58
---
I tested the same device here and got the same error as you reported.
Good to know, that Xen doesn't have any problem. This really means, that it is
most
On Thu, Apr 5, 2012 at 6:06 AM, Milton Miller milt...@bga.com wrote:
On Wed, 4 Apr 2012 about 22:12:36 +0200, Sasha Levin wrote:
I've starting seeing soft lockups resulting from smp_call_function()
calls. I've attached two different backtraces of this happening with
different code paths.
On 04/01/2012 07:23 PM, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 04/01/2012 04:48 PM, Raghavendra K T wrote:
I have patch something like below in mind to try:
diff --git a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
index d3b98b1..5127668 100644
--- a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
+++ b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
@@ -1608,15
On 04/02/2012 12:51 PM, Raghavendra K T wrote:
On 04/01/2012 07:23 PM, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 04/01/2012 04:48 PM, Raghavendra K T wrote:
I have patch something like below in mind to try:
diff --git a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
index d3b98b1..5127668 100644
---
On 04/02/2012 12:26 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
One thing about it is that it can give many false positives. Consider a
fine-grained spinlock that is being accessed by many threads. That is,
the lock is taken and released with high frequency, but there is no
contention, because each vcpu
On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 09:42:32PM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
We've hit a kernel host panic, when issuing a 'system_reset' with an
82576 nic assigned and a Windows guest. Host system is a PowerEdge R815.
[Hardware Error]: Hardware error from APEI Generic Hardware Error Source:
32993
On Thu, Mar 08, 2012 at 11:10:24AM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
Required for INTx masking / host IRQ sharing support of assigned
devices.
Corresponding kvm.git hash: 186195928e
Signed-off-by: Jan Kiszka jan.kis...@siemens.com
Acked-by: Michael S. Tsirkin m...@redhat.com
---
On Thu, Mar 08, 2012 at 11:10:25AM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
Will be used by PCI device assignment code.
Signed-off-by: Jan Kiszka jan.kis...@siemens.com
Acked-by: Michael S. Tsirkin m...@redhat.com
---
kvm-all.c |8
kvm.h |1 +
2 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 0
On Thu, Mar 08, 2012 at 11:10:26AM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
Enable the new KVM feature that allows legacy interrupt sharing for
PCI-2.3-compliant devices. This requires to synchronize any guest
change of the INTx mask bit to the kernel.
The feature is controlled by the property 'share_intx'
On Thu, Mar 08, 2012 at 11:10:27AM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
INTx sharing is a bit more expensive than exclusive host interrupts, but
this channel is not supposed to be used for high-performance scenarios
anyway. Modern devices support MSI/MSI-X and do not depend on using INTx
under critical
On 04/05/2012 02:31 PM, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 04/02/2012 12:51 PM, Raghavendra K T wrote:
On 04/01/2012 07:23 PM, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 04/01/2012 04:48 PM, Raghavendra K T wrote:
I have patch something like below in mind to try:
diff --git a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
index
On 04/04/2012 11:12 PM, Sasha Levin wrote:
Hi all,
I've starting seeing soft lockups resulting from smp_call_function()
calls. I've attached two different backtraces of this happening with
different code paths.
This is running inside a KVM guest with the trinity fuzzer, using
today's
On 04/04/2012 01:29 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
ok. seems to be. will move over to perf as its working fine inside guest.
Good riddance IMO. I managed to run it on a guest (but not on my
host!). The thing is buggy. It does not use global ctrl MSR to enable
counters and kvm has all of them
On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 10:43:03AM -0700, Shirley Ma wrote:
On Tue, 2012-03-27 at 18:09 +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
Hi:
Thanks for the work and it looks very reasonable, some questions
below.
Yes I am happy to see the per-cpu work resurrected.
Some comments below.
On 03/23/2012 07:48
On Thu, Apr 5, 2012 at 2:24 PM, Avi Kivity a...@redhat.com wrote:
On 04/04/2012 11:12 PM, Sasha Levin wrote:
Hi all,
I've starting seeing soft lockups resulting from smp_call_function()
calls. I've attached two different backtraces of this happening with
different code paths.
This is
On Thu, Apr 05, 2012 at 03:27:18PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 04/04/2012 01:29 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
ok. seems to be. will move over to perf as its working fine inside guest.
Good riddance IMO. I managed to run it on a guest (but not on my
host!). The thing is buggy. It does not
On 04/05/2012 03:37 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
On Thu, Apr 05, 2012 at 03:27:18PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 04/04/2012 01:29 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
ok. seems to be. will move over to perf as its working fine inside
guest.
Good riddance IMO. I managed to run it on a guest
On 04/05/2012 03:32 PM, Sasha Levin wrote:
It would be good to enhance smp_call_function_*() to do this
automatically when it happens - it's spinning there anyway, so it might
as well count the iterations and NMI the lagging cpu if it waits for too
long.
What do you think about
On Thu, Apr 05, 2012 at 03:48:51PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 04/05/2012 03:37 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
On Thu, Apr 05, 2012 at 03:27:18PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 04/04/2012 01:29 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
ok. seems to be. will move over to perf as its working fine inside
On 04/05/2012 04:26 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
On Thu, Apr 05, 2012 at 03:48:51PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 04/05/2012 03:37 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
On Thu, Apr 05, 2012 at 03:27:18PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 04/04/2012 01:29 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
ok. seems to be. will
On Thu, Apr 05, 2012 at 04:28:48PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 04/05/2012 04:26 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
On Thu, Apr 05, 2012 at 03:48:51PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 04/05/2012 03:37 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
On Thu, Apr 05, 2012 at 03:27:18PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 04/04/2012
On Thu, Apr 05, 2012 at 04:48:57PM +0300, Gleb Natapov wrote:
On Thu, Apr 05, 2012 at 04:28:48PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 04/05/2012 04:26 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
On Thu, Apr 05, 2012 at 03:48:51PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 04/05/2012 03:37 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
On Thu, Apr
On 04/05/2012 04:57 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
May be it used NMI based profiling. We should ask oprofile developers.
As I said I am almost sure my inability to run it on a host is probably
PEBKAC, although I ran the same script exactly on the host and the
guest (the script is from the
On Thu, Apr 05, 2012 at 05:38:40PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 04/05/2012 04:57 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
May be it used NMI based profiling. We should ask oprofile developers.
As I said I am almost sure my inability to run it on a host is probably
PEBKAC, although I ran the same
On Thu, 2012-04-05 at 12:34 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 09:42:32PM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
We've hit a kernel host panic, when issuing a 'system_reset' with an
82576 nic assigned and a Windows guest. Host system is a PowerEdge R815.
[Hardware Error]:
On Thu, Apr 05, 2012 at 08:42:03AM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
So far so good.
+ * We especially do not want MSI-X
+ * enabled since it lives in MMIO space, which is about to get
+ * disabled.
I think we are better off dropping the above, because it's
a bug that
On Thu, 2012-04-05 at 15:28 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 10:43:03AM -0700, Shirley Ma wrote:
On Tue, 2012-03-27 at 18:09 +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
Hi:
Thanks for the work and it looks very reasonable, some questions
below.
Yes I am happy to see the
On 04/03/2012 03:22 PM, Paul Mackerras wrote:
On Tue, Apr 03, 2012 at 10:03:05PM +1000, Paul Mackerras wrote:
The following changes since commit 592f5d87b3feee9d60411f19d583038c0c7670ad:
OK, I messed up the git request-pull command. The request should have
looked like this:
The
On 04/04/2012 05:39 PM, Michael Roth wrote:
Will command line take in account hot-plugged devices?
No, that's a good point. We'd probably need to generate the options
required to ensure the devices are created on the target, and we'd only
be able to do that just before sending the device
Linus, please pull a few fixes from
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/virt/kvm/kvm.git kvm-updates/3.4
A bunch of powerpc KVM fixes, a guest and a host RCU fix (unrelated),
and a small build fix.
Alexander Graf (3):
KVM: PPC:
On Thu, 2012-04-05 at 08:22 -0700, Shirley Ma wrote:
Haven't had time to focus on single stream result yet.
I forgot to mention that if I switch the vhost scheduling to per-device
based from per vq based, this minor single stream test regression will
be gone. However the improvement of
In a recent conversation, Linus persuaded me that it's time for change
in our git workflow; the following will bring it in line with the
current practices of most trees.
The current 'master' branch will be abandoned (still available for
reviewing history). The new branch structure will be as
Hi Avi,
Thanks very much for your review!
Sorry for the delay reply since i was on vacation.
On 04/01/2012 11:52 PM, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 03/29/2012 11:25 AM, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
Using PTE_LIST_WRITE_PROTECT bit in rmap store the write-protect status to
avoid unnecessary shadow page
On 04/01/2012 11:53 PM, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 03/29/2012 11:25 AM, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
It depends on PTE_LIST_WRITE_PROTECT bit in rmap which let us quickly know
whether the page is writable out of mmu-lock
Signed-off-by: Xiao Guangrong xiaoguangr...@linux.vnet.ibm.com
---
Hi,
I started a kvm VM by adding -smp 2 option. From inside the guest, I
can see that /proc/cpuinfo outputs 2 cores.
However, in the host, I only observe one qemu-kvm process for that VM.
Does that mean this VM is actually running on one core?
If so, how to make a VM to run on 2 or more cores?
On Thu, Apr 05, 2012 at 02:28:51PM -0400, Steven wrote:
Hi,
I started a kvm VM by adding -smp 2 option. From inside the guest, I
can see that /proc/cpuinfo outputs 2 cores.
However, in the host, I only observe one qemu-kvm process for that VM.
Does that mean this VM is actually running on one
Hi, Daniel,
Thanks for your quick response. However, the ps -eLf show 4 threads
for the VM and I checked 4 threads have the same tgid.
But the VM I created is with -smp 2 option. Could you explain this? Thanks.
On Thu, Apr 5, 2012 at 2:40 PM, Daniel P. Berrange berra...@redhat.com wrote:
On
On Thu, Apr 05, 2012 at 02:52:40PM -0400, Steven wrote:
Hi, Daniel,
Thanks for your quick response. However, the ps -eLf show 4 threads
for the VM and I checked 4 threads have the same tgid.
But the VM I created is with -smp 2 option. Could you explain this? Thanks.
As well as the vCPU
On 04/02/2012 12:23 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 03/29/2012 11:27 AM, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
If the the present bit of page fault error code is set, it indicates
the shadow page is populated on all levels, it means what we do is only
modify the access bit which can be done out of mmu-lock
The
A plain v3.3 kernel hits this when I just type reboot on a 32 cpu (2
socket * 8 core * 2 HT) system:
sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] Synchronizing SCSI cache
Restarting system.
machine restart
[ cut here ]
WARNING: at arch/x86/kernel/smp.c:120 native_smp_send_reschedule+0x5c/0x60()
On 04/01/2012 08:58 PM, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 03/30/2012 12:18 PM, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
On 03/29/2012 08:57 PM, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 03/29/2012 01:40 PM, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
* Implementation
We can freely walk the page between walk_shadow_page_lockless_begin and
The Buildbot has detected a new failure on builder next-ppc64 while building
kvm.
Full details are available at:
http://buildbot.b1-systems.de/kvm/builders/next-ppc64/builds/495
Buildbot URL: http://buildbot.b1-systems.de/kvm/
Buildslave for this Build: b1_kvm_1
Build Reason: The Nightly
The Buildbot has detected a new failure on builder next-ppc44x while building
kvm.
Full details are available at:
http://buildbot.b1-systems.de/kvm/builders/next-ppc44x/builds/494
Buildbot URL: http://buildbot.b1-systems.de/kvm/
Buildslave for this Build: b1_kvm_1
Build Reason: The Nightly
On Thu, Apr 5, 2012 at 8:11 PM, Gleb Natapov g...@redhat.com wrote:
On Thu, Apr 05, 2012 at 05:38:40PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 04/05/2012 04:57 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
May be it used NMI based profiling. We should ask oprofile developers.
As I said I am almost sure my inability to
On 04/06/2012 05:57 AM, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
What's the difference between this and
if test_and_set_bit(spte.lock)
return_to_guest
else
do checks and cmpxchg
?
test_and_set_bit is a atomic operation that is i want to avoid.
Right. Can you check what the effect
On 04/03/2012 03:22 PM, Paul Mackerras wrote:
On Tue, Apr 03, 2012 at 10:03:05PM +1000, Paul Mackerras wrote:
The following changes since commit 592f5d87b3feee9d60411f19d583038c0c7670ad:
OK, I messed up the git request-pull command. The request should have
looked like this:
The
In a recent conversation, Linus persuaded me that it's time for change
in our git workflow; the following will bring it in line with the
current practices of most trees.
The current 'master' branch will be abandoned (still available for
reviewing history). The new branch structure will be as
50 matches
Mail list logo
