On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 5:11 PM, Marc Zyngier marc.zyng...@arm.com wrote:
On Tue, Jun 03 2014 at 3:14:33 am BST, Lei Wen adrian.w...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Marc,
On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 5:27 PM, Marc Zyngier marc.zyng...@arm.com wrote:
kvmtool tells you where the console lives (it is one of the
Il 04/06/2014 03:10, Jidong Xiao ha scritto:
diff --git a/qemu-2.0.0/target-i386/kvm.c.orig b/qemu-2.0.0/target-i386/kvm.c
index 4389959..b8b282d 100644
--- a/qemu-2.0.0/target-i386/kvm.c.orig
+++ b/qemu-2.0.0/target-i386/kvm.c
@@ -530,7 +530,7 @@ int kvm_arch_init_vcpu(CPUState *cs)
On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 3:09 AM, Paolo Bonzini pbonz...@redhat.com wrote:
Il 04/06/2014 03:10, Jidong Xiao ha scritto:
diff --git a/qemu-2.0.0/target-i386/kvm.c.orig
b/qemu-2.0.0/target-i386/kvm.c
index 4389959..b8b282d 100644
--- a/qemu-2.0.0/target-i386/kvm.c.orig
+++
On 2014-06-03 22:11, Bandan Das wrote:
Paolo Bonzini pbonz...@redhat.com writes:
Il 06/05/2014 08:19, Bandan Das ha scritto:
Reference: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=54521
The vmxon region is unused by nvmx, but adding these checks
are probably harmless and may detect buggy
On Wed, Jun 04 2014 at 7:19:42 am BST, Lei Wen adrian.w...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 5:11 PM, Marc Zyngier marc.zyng...@arm.com wrote:
On Tue, Jun 03 2014 at 3:14:33 am BST, Lei Wen adrian.w...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hi Marc,
On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 5:27 PM, Marc Zyngier
Il 03/06/2014 22:27, Bandan Das ha scritto:
Adds a simple test for interrupt acknowledgement and change
invept behavior to check for supported invalidation contexts
Bandan Das (2):
VMX: check for supported contexts before calling invept
VMX: Add test for interrupt acknowledgement
Paul Mackerras pau...@samba.org writes:
On Tue, Jun 03, 2014 at 05:46:11PM +0530, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
We use time base for PURR and SPURR emulation with PR KVM since we
are emulating a single threaded core. When using time base
we need to make sure that we don't accumulate time spent in
Linus,
The following changes since commit 0f689a33ad17845363acdc6d52783befd6ad116c:
Merge branch 'for-linus' of
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/s390/linux (2014-04-16 11:28:25
-0700)
are available in the git repository at:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/virt/kvm/kvm.git
We use time base for PURR and SPURR emulation with PR KVM since we
are emulating a single threaded core. When using time base
we need to make sure that we don't accumulate time spent in the host
in PURR and SPURR value.
Also we don't need to emulate mtspr because both the registers are
hypervisor
Aneesh Kumar K.V aneesh.ku...@linux.vnet.ibm.com writes:
Paul Mackerras pau...@samba.org writes:
On Tue, Jun 03, 2014 at 05:46:11PM +0530, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
We use time base for PURR and SPURR emulation with PR KVM since we
are emulating a single threaded core. When using time base
we
Currently when a KVM region is deleted or moved after
KVM_SET_USER_MEMORY_REGION ioctl, the corresponding
intermediate physical memory is not unmapped.
This patch corrects this and unmaps the region's IPA range
in kvm_arch_commit_memory_region using unmap_stage2_range.
The patch was tested with
Paolo,
I noticed the monitor=mwait=nop patch is making its way upstream, so
thanks !
I'm still interested in following up with something that would enable
this behavior only conditionally (e.g. following an ioctl call from
userspace to enable it only for the (set of) vcpu(s) belonging to one
On 04.06.14 16:39, Gabriel L. Somlo wrote:
Paolo,
I noticed the monitor=mwait=nop patch is making its way upstream, so
thanks !
I'm still interested in following up with something that would enable
this behavior only conditionally (e.g. following an ioctl call from
userspace to enable it only
On 04.06.14 17:05, Gabriel L. Somlo wrote:
On Wed, Jun 04, 2014 at 04:44:13PM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
On 04.06.14 16:39, Gabriel L. Somlo wrote:
Paolo,
I noticed the monitor=mwait=nop patch is making its way upstream, so
thanks !
I'm still interested in following up with something that
On Wed, Jun 04, 2014 at 04:44:13PM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
On 04.06.14 16:39, Gabriel L. Somlo wrote:
Paolo,
I noticed the monitor=mwait=nop patch is making its way upstream, so
thanks !
I'm still interested in following up with something that would enable
this behavior only
Il 04/06/2014 16:44, Alexander Graf ha scritto:
Obviously, if you really like the current behavior better you can
always reject whatever patch I'll come up with, but I'd like to at
least try and see what it would look like :)
I think it's perfectly fine to leave mwait always implemented as
On Wed, Jun 04, 2014 at 05:09:49PM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
I grep-ed through the kvm sources for KVM_CAP for some inspiration,
and it looks more like KVM_CAP_* is a way to tell userspace what the
kernel supports, but nothing I saw showed me an example of a tunable
feature that userspace
On Mon, Jun 02, 2014 at 02:58:00PM -0700, Eric Dumazet wrote:
On Tue, 2014-06-03 at 00:30 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
All memory accesses are done under some VQ mutex.
So lock/unlock all VQs is a faster equivalent of synchronize_rcu()
for memory access changes.
Some guests cause a
On Wed, Jun 04, 2014 at 01:22:49PM +0930, Rusty Russell wrote:
Vlad Zolotarov vl...@cloudius-systems.com writes:
Rusty, hi!
I'd like to ask for a small clarification about the virtio spec.
The virtio specification is put the way that it allows the out-of-order
completions in general.
On Wed, Jun 04, 2014 at 01:07:21PM -0400, Gabriel L. Somlo wrote:
On Wed, Jun 04, 2014 at 05:09:49PM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
I grep-ed through the kvm sources for KVM_CAP for some inspiration,
and it looks more like KVM_CAP_* is a way to tell userspace what the
kernel supports, but
Jidong Xiao jidong.x...@gmail.com writes:
On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 3:09 AM, Paolo Bonzini pbonz...@redhat.com wrote:
Il 04/06/2014 03:10, Jidong Xiao ha scritto:
diff --git a/qemu-2.0.0/target-i386/kvm.c.orig
b/qemu-2.0.0/target-i386/kvm.c
index 4389959..b8b282d 100644
---
On Jun 4, 2014, at 7:34 PM, Paolo Bonzini pbonz...@redhat.com wrote:
Il 04/06/2014 16:44, Alexander Graf ha scritto:
Obviously, if you really like the current behavior better you can
always reject whatever patch I'll come up with, but I'd like to at
least try and see what it would look
On Wed, Jun 04, 2014 at 06:34:04PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
Il 04/06/2014 16:44, Alexander Graf ha scritto:
Obviously, if you really like the current behavior better you can
always reject whatever patch I'll come up with, but I'd like to at
least try and see what it would look like :)
On Wed, Jun 04, 2014 at 10:06:18PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Wed, Jun 04, 2014 at 01:07:21PM -0400, Gabriel L. Somlo wrote:
Ah, so kvm_vcpu_ioctl_set_cpuid() and friends, morally similar to
kvm_vcpu_ioctl_enable_cap() on ppc, except it turns on cpuid flags
instead of entire kvm
On Wed, Jun 04, 2014 at 10:08:12PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Wed, Jun 04, 2014 at 06:34:04PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
Il 04/06/2014 16:44, Alexander Graf ha scritto:
Obviously, if you really like the current behavior better you can
always reject whatever patch I'll come
On Wed, Jun 04, 2014 at 03:24:06PM -0400, Gabriel L. Somlo wrote:
On Wed, Jun 04, 2014 at 10:06:18PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Wed, Jun 04, 2014 at 01:07:21PM -0400, Gabriel L. Somlo wrote:
Ah, so kvm_vcpu_ioctl_set_cpuid() and friends, morally similar to
On Wed, Jun 04, 2014 at 03:33:38PM -0400, Gabriel L. Somlo wrote:
On Wed, Jun 04, 2014 at 10:08:12PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Wed, Jun 04, 2014 at 06:34:04PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
Il 04/06/2014 16:44, Alexander Graf ha scritto:
Obviously, if you really like the
On Wed, Jun 04, 2014 at 10:12:39PM +0300, Nadav Amit wrote:
Regardless to the whole discussion of what the guest is informed about, I
think it might be better to implement mwait and monitor correctly according
to the spec and let the instructions to be fully emulated.
Both mwait and monitor
On Tue, Jun 03, 2014 at 06:57:43AM -0700, Eric Dumazet wrote:
On Tue, 2014-06-03 at 14:48 +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
Il 02/06/2014 23:58, Eric Dumazet ha scritto:
This looks dubious
What about using kfree_rcu() instead ?
It would lead to unbound allocation from userspace.
Look
On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 3:08 PM, Bandan Das b...@redhat.com wrote:
Jidong Xiao jidong.x...@gmail.com writes:
On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 3:09 AM, Paolo Bonzini pbonz...@redhat.com wrote:
Il 04/06/2014 03:10, Jidong Xiao ha scritto:
diff --git a/qemu-2.0.0/target-i386/kvm.c.orig
On Jun 4, 2014, at 10:43 PM, Gabriel L. Somlo gso...@gmail.com wrote:
My implementation still emulates the instruction as a NOP, but first checks for
an exception.
On Wed, Jun 04, 2014 at 10:12:39PM +0300, Nadav Amit wrote:
I'd be curious how you're dealing with the hidden CPU state which
On Wed, Jun 04, 2014 at 11:01:50PM +0300, Nadav Amit wrote:
On Jun 4, 2014, at 10:43 PM, Gabriel L. Somlo gso...@gmail.com wrote:
My implementation still emulates the instruction as a NOP, but first checks
for an exception.
[...]
Anyhow, if you want a real mwait emulation, you can
On Wed, Jun 04, 2014 at 06:34:04PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
That should be the purpose of KVM_GET_EMULATED_CPUID, so MWAIT could be
added in __do_cpuid_ent_emulated. However, the corresponding QEMU patches
were never included. Borislav, can you refresh them?
/me goes and swaps in all the
On Jun 4, 2014, at 11:11 PM, Gabriel L. Somlo gso...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jun 04, 2014 at 11:01:50PM +0300, Nadav Amit wrote:
On Jun 4, 2014, at 10:43 PM, Gabriel L. Somlo gso...@gmail.com wrote:
My implementation still emulates the instruction as a NOP, but first checks
for an
Resending patch, noticed I forgot to adjust start_ipa properly in
stage2_wp_mask_range() and then noticed that pte's can be indexed directly.
The patch applies cleanly after 2/4 and 4/4 applies cleanly after this patch.
This patch adds support for keeping track of VM dirty pages. As dirty page
Verify that vmon fails with unaligned vmxon region or
any bits set beyong the physical address width. Also verify
failure with an invalid revision identifier.
Signed-off-by: Bandan Das b...@redhat.com
---
x86/vmx.c | 46 +++---
1 file changed, 43
Check if the vmcs pointer is not aligned to page size,
and if bits beyond physical address width are set. Also,
vmclear and vmptrld should fail if the vmxon region is
supplied instead of the vmcs
Signed-off-by: Bandan Das b...@redhat.com
---
x86/vmx.c | 63
A couple more updates to test_vmxon, test_vmptrld
and test_vmclear based on kvm commits -
3573e22cfecaac83f82ef4f6847d90e466fc8e10
KVM: nVMX: additional checks on vmxon region
96ec146330d18a938b4773be8d6dd1f93399507c
KVM: nVMX: fail on invalid vmclear/vmptrld pointer
Bandan Das (2):
VMX: Add
Jidong Xiao jidong.x...@gmail.com writes:
..
Hi, Bandan,
Thanks for the advice. I think Paolo has incorporated this patch into
his patch sets, and he sent the revised version in a separate email
earlier today with the subject [PULL 11/11] kvm: Fix eax for cpuid
leaf 0x4000.
Oops!
On 04.06.14 13:17, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
We use time base for PURR and SPURR emulation with PR KVM since we
are emulating a single threaded core. When using time base
we need to make sure that we don't accumulate time spent in the host
in PURR and SPURR value.
Also we don't need to emulate
Hello
Just a bump to see if anyone can help:)
MW
On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 6:08 PM, Marcus White roastedseawee...@gmail.com wrote:
Cant the pages be locked down by the host when it gets the call down
for an operation with a buffer(like if a usual user mode process
case), and once locked down in
On Mon, Jun 02, 2014 at 10:57:05AM -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
On Sat, May 31, 2014 at 5:42 AM, Gavin Shan gws...@linux.vnet.ibm.com wrote:
On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 04:12:32PM -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 01:01:10PM +1000, Gavin Shan wrote:
.../...
[ Remove the confusing
Paul Mackerras pau...@samba.org writes:
On Tue, Jun 03, 2014 at 05:46:11PM +0530, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
We use time base for PURR and SPURR emulation with PR KVM since we
are emulating a single threaded core. When using time base
we need to make sure that we don't accumulate time spent in
We use time base for PURR and SPURR emulation with PR KVM since we
are emulating a single threaded core. When using time base
we need to make sure that we don't accumulate time spent in the host
in PURR and SPURR value.
Also we don't need to emulate mtspr because both the registers are
hypervisor
Aneesh Kumar K.V aneesh.ku...@linux.vnet.ibm.com writes:
Paul Mackerras pau...@samba.org writes:
On Tue, Jun 03, 2014 at 05:46:11PM +0530, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
We use time base for PURR and SPURR emulation with PR KVM since we
are emulating a single threaded core. When using time base
we
On 04.06.14 13:17, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
We use time base for PURR and SPURR emulation with PR KVM since we
are emulating a single threaded core. When using time base
we need to make sure that we don't accumulate time spent in the host
in PURR and SPURR value.
Also we don't need to emulate
46 matches
Mail list logo
