1. If IO to a block device goes through QEMU and not vhost, are there
data copies between kernel and user mode if I do IO to a block device
or is it zero copy? Kind of related to Question (2) also.
I'm not sure, it perhaps depend on which IO mode you chose, qemu pthreads
IO, or linux AIO?
1. If IO to a block device goes through QEMU and not vhost, are there data
copies between kernel and user mode if I do IO to a block device or is it
zero copy? Kind of related to Question (2) also.
An additional copy will be avoided only by using vhost, so if you are using
vhost you can call
On Tue, Jun 03 2014, Joonsoo Kim wrote:
Currently, there are two users on CMA functionality, one is the DMA
subsystem and the other is the kvm on powerpc. They have their own code
to manage CMA reserved area even if they looks really similar.
From my guess, it is caused by some needs on bitmap
On Tue, Jun 03 2014, Joonsoo Kim wrote:
Now, we have general CMA reserved area management framework,
so use it for future maintainabilty. There is no functional change.
Signed-off-by: Joonsoo Kim iamjoonsoo@lge.com
Acked-by: Michal Nazarewicz min...@mina86.com
diff --git
On Tue, Jun 03 2014, Joonsoo Kim wrote:
Now, we have general CMA reserved area management framework,
so use it for future maintainabilty. There is no functional change.
Signed-off-by: Joonsoo Kim iamjoonsoo@lge.com
Acked-by: Michal Nazarewicz min...@mina86.com
--
Best regards,
On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 11:52:12PM +0200, Andreas Herrmann wrote:
+/*
+ * Hypercalls for KVM.
+ *
+ * Hypercall number is passed in v0.
+ * Return value will be placed in v0.
+ * Up to 3 arguments are passed in a0, a1, and a2.
+ */
+static inline unsigned long kvm_hypercall0(unsigned long
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 virtio-mmio
devices that it prints out when it starts). The address you
Il 02/06/2014 21:25, Gabriel L. Somlo ha scritto:
Would it make sense to make this a module parameter,
(e.g., int emulate_mwait) ?
Default would be 0 (no emulation). 1 would mean emulate as nop, and
if anyone ever figures out how to do proper page-locking based
emulation we could use 2 to
Il 02/06/2014 19:28, Alex Williamson ha scritto:
The latest Nvidia driver (337.88) specifically checks for KVM as the
hypervisor and reports Code 43 for the driver in a Windows guest when
found. Removing or changing the KVM signature is sufficient for the
driver to load and work. This patch
Il 03/06/2014 09:02, Michal Nazarewicz ha scritto:
On Tue, Jun 03 2014, Joonsoo Kim wrote:
Now, we have general CMA reserved area management framework,
so use it for future maintainabilty. There is no functional change.
Signed-off-by: Joonsoo Kim iamjoonsoo@lge.com
Acked-by: Michal
A few additional questions:)
1. If IO to a block device goes through QEMU and not vhost, are there
data copies between kernel and user mode if I do IO to a block device
or is it zero copy? Kind of related to Question (2) also.
An additional copy will be avoided only by using vhost, so if you are
I know that kvm support network tx zero-copy when using vhost, but rx copy
is still performed in vhost, because the NIC cannot determine DMA to which
VM's rx buffers before L2 switching(unless vhost using page-flip between
HVA-HPA and GPA-HPA, or macvtap over SRIOV-VF is used).
Storage has
Reported-by: hrg hrgstep...@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini pbonz...@redhat.com
---
virt/kvm/kvm_main.c | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
diff --git a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
index 95b4c2b3906a..c86be0f983db 100644
--- a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
+++ b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
Il 01/06/2014 01:05, Rickard Strandqvist ha scritto:
There is a risk that the variable will be used without being initialized.
This was largely found by using a static code analysis program called
cppcheck.
Signed-off-by: Rickard Strandqvist rickard_strandqv...@spectrumdigital.se
No,
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
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.
translate_desc() still uses rcu_read_lock(), its not clear if the mutex
is really held.
Yes, vhost_get_vq_desc must be called with
A few additional questions:)
1. If IO to a block device goes through QEMU and not vhost, are there
data copies between kernel and user mode if I do IO to a block device
or is it zero copy? Kind of related to Question (2) also.
An additional copy will be avoided only by using vhost, so if you are
03.06.2014 16:04, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
Il 01/06/2014 01:05, Rickard Strandqvist ha scritto:
There is a risk that the variable will be used without being initialized.
This was largely found by using a static code analysis program called
cppcheck.
Signed-off-by: Rickard Strandqvist
Il 03/06/2014 15:06, Michael Tokarev ha scritto:
03.06.2014 16:04, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
Il 01/06/2014 01:05, Rickard Strandqvist ha scritto:
There is a risk that the variable will be used without being initialized.
This was largely found by using a static code analysis program called
On 06/03/2014 08:48 AM, 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.
translate_desc() still uses rcu_read_lock(), its not clear if the mutex
is really
Il 03/06/2014 15:35, Vlad Yasevich ha scritto:
Yes, vhost_get_vq_desc must be called with the vq mutex held.
The rcu_read_lock/unlock in translate_desc is unnecessary.
If that's true, then does dev-memory really needs to be rcu protected?
It appears to always be read under mutex.
It's
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 at how we did this in commit
c3059477fce2d956a0bb3e04357324780c5d8eeb
Il 03/06/2014 15:57, Eric Dumazet ha scritto:
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 at how we did this in
On Tue, Jun 03, 2014 at 11:17:48AM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
I think it's fine as it is now. :)
On Mon, Jun 02, 2014 at 09:55:18PM -0400, Gabriel L. Somlo wrote:
W.r.t. monitor/mwait, a guest can do one of the following:
1. Never check CPUID, and never use monitor/mwait
- This
On Tue, Jun 03, 2014 at 10:30:31AM +0200, Ralf Baechle wrote:
On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 11:52:12PM +0200, Andreas Herrmann wrote:
+/*
+ * Hypercalls for KVM.
+ *
+ * Hypercall number is passed in v0.
+ * Return value will be placed in v0.
+ * Up to 3 arguments are passed in a0, a1,
Hi
Please, send any topic that you are interested in covering.
* Machine as QOM (Marcel)
- Solve the 'sensible' issues.
- Choose as first tasks the ones that will be more useful.
- Select solutions agreed by everyone.
Thanks, Juan.
Call details:
15:00 CEST
13:00 UTC
09:00 EDT
Every two
On 06/03/2014 04:21 PM, Gabriel L. Somlo wrote:
On Tue, Jun 03, 2014 at 11:17:48AM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
I think it's fine as it is now. :)
On Mon, Jun 02, 2014 at 09:55:18PM -0400, Gabriel L. Somlo wrote:
W.r.t. monitor/mwait, a guest can do one of the following:
1. Never check CPUID,
On Jun 3, 2014, at 9:40 AM, Daney, David david.da...@caviumnetworks.com
wrote:
In cases like this, I always wonder WWPD (What Would Pinski Do)...
Let's get him to opine.
Andrew, the patch in question is:
http://www.linux-mips.org/archives/linux-mips/2014-05/msg00309.html
Yes
In cases like this, I always wonder WWPD (What Would Pinski Do)...
Let's get him to opine.
Andrew, the patch in question is:
http://www.linux-mips.org/archives/linux-mips/2014-05/msg00309.html
Thanks,
David Daney
On 06/03/2014 08:03 AM, Andreas Herrmann wrote:
On Tue, Jun 03, 2014 at
Hello,
Before I spam this list with details for an inappropriate question,
is it acceptable to ask a question about slow RAM access speeds on
Windows Server 2008 R2 guests running on Ubuntu Server 14.04 LTS/KVM?
Regards,
Mark
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe kvm in
On Tue, Jun 03, 2014 at 05:37:08PM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
On 06/03/2014 04:21 PM, Gabriel L. Somlo wrote:
On Tue, Jun 03, 2014 at 11:17:48AM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
I think it's fine as it is now. :)
On Mon, Jun 02, 2014 at 09:55:18PM -0400, Gabriel L. Somlo wrote:
W.r.t.
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=77271
Bug ID: 77271
Summary: CPUID Leaf 0x4000 return 0 in eax
Product: Virtualization
Version: unspecified
Kernel Version: 3.14
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
Tree:
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 L1 hypervisors in
the future!
Applied
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
lib/x86/isr.c | 32
It's incorrect to assume the context in which invept
is called. Check what is supported and fallback if
single context invalidation isn't supported
Signed-off-by: Bandan Das b...@redhat.com
---
x86/vmx.c | 20
x86/vmx.h | 1 +
x86/vmx_tests.c | 14 +++---
If the hypervisor has the interrupt acknowledgement bit set,
vector information is already present in intr_info during a vmexit.
The hypervisor then uses it to call the appropriate handler.
Signed-off-by: Bandan Das b...@redhat.com
---
lib/x86/isr.c | 32
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=77271
Alex Williamson alex.william...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
This patch adds support for handling 2nd stage page faults during migration,
it disables faulting in huge pages, and disolves huge pages to page tables.
In case migration is canceled huge pages will be used again.
Signed-off-by: Mario Smarduch m.smard...@samsung.com
---
arch/arm/kvm/mmu.c | 36
This patch adds support for dirty page logging so far tested only on ARMv7.
With dirty page logging, GICv2 vGIC and arch timer save/restore support, live
migration is supported.
Dirty page logging support -
- initially write protects VM RAM memory regions - 2nd stage page tables
- add support
Patch adds HYP interface for global VM TLB invalidation without address
parameter. Added ARM version of kvm_flush_remote_tlbs(), made the generic
implementation a weak symbol.
Signed-off-by: Mario Smarduch m.smard...@samsung.com
---
arch/arm/include/asm/kvm_asm.h |1 +
Patch adds memslot support for initial write protection and split up of huge
pages. This patch series assumes that huge PUDs will not be used to map VM
memory. This patch depends on the unmap_range() patch, it needs to be applied
first.
Signed-off-by: Mario Smarduch m.smard...@samsung.com
---
This patch adds support for keeping track of VM dirty pages. As dirty page log
is retrieved, the pages that have been written are write protected again for
next write and log read.
Signed-off-by: Mario Smarduch m.smard...@samsung.com
---
arch/arm/include/asm/kvm_host.h |3 ++
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=77271
--- Comment #2 from Jidong Xiao jidong.x...@gmail.com ---
Oh, thanks Alex. I think you are right here, it's not a bug. But do you think
that, does it make sense to submit a patch to qemu, so as to make them
consistent between userspace qemu and
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=77271
--- Comment #3 from Alex Williamson alex.william...@redhat.com ---
The best way to find out is to submit a patch.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching the assignee of the bug.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line
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 the host kernel, the physical address
be used directly for DMA, whether send or recieve? Not sure if I fully
understand why a copy
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=77271
Jidong Xiao jidong.x...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
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. Although it states that it's mostly relevant to
the virtio-blk it
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 the host
in PURR and SPURR value.
Mostly
On Tue, Jun 03 2014, Joonsoo Kim wrote:
Currently, there are two users on CMA functionality, one is the DMA
subsystem and the other is the kvm on powerpc. They have their own code
to manage CMA reserved area even if they looks really similar.
From my guess, it is caused by some needs on bitmap
On Tue, Jun 03 2014, Joonsoo Kim wrote:
Now, we have general CMA reserved area management framework,
so use it for future maintainabilty. There is no functional change.
Signed-off-by: Joonsoo Kim iamjoonsoo@lge.com
Acked-by: Michal Nazarewicz min...@mina86.com
diff --git
On Tue, Jun 03 2014, Joonsoo Kim wrote:
Now, we have general CMA reserved area management framework,
so use it for future maintainabilty. There is no functional change.
Signed-off-by: Joonsoo Kim iamjoonsoo@lge.com
Acked-by: Michal Nazarewicz min...@mina86.com
--
Best regards,
Am 03.06.2014 um 07:54 schrieb Paul Mackerras pau...@samba.org:
On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 01:25:11PM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
On 20.05.14 10:30, Gavin Shan wrote:
If we detects frozen state on PE that has been passed to guest, we
needn't handle it. Instead, we rely on the guest to
On Tue, 2014-06-03 at 09:45 +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
For EEH it could as well be a dumb eventfd - really just a side
channel that can tell user space that something happened
asynchronously :).
Which the host kernel may have no way to detect without actively poking
at the device (fences in
Il 03/06/2014 09:02, Michal Nazarewicz ha scritto:
On Tue, Jun 03 2014, Joonsoo Kim wrote:
Now, we have general CMA reserved area management framework,
so use it for future maintainabilty. There is no functional change.
Signed-off-by: Joonsoo Kim iamjoonsoo@lge.com
Acked-by: Michal
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
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 the host
in PURR and SPURR value.
Mostly
56 matches
Mail list logo
