On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 12:28:32PM +0200, Christoffer Dall wrote:
On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 06:12:18PM +0200, Andrew Jones wrote:
spinlock torture tests made it clear that checking mmu_enabled()
every time we call spin_lock is a bad idea.
why a bad idea? Does it break, is it slow?
Just
On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 12:44:27PM +0200, Andrew Jones wrote:
On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 12:28:32PM +0200, Christoffer Dall wrote:
On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 06:12:18PM +0200, Andrew Jones wrote:
spinlock torture tests made it clear that checking mmu_enabled()
every time we call spin_lock is a
-Original Message-
From: Alex Williamson [mailto:alex.william...@redhat.com]
Sent: Friday, June 19, 2015 4:04 AM
To: Wu, Feng
Cc: Eric Auger; Avi Kivity; kvm@vger.kernel.org; linux-ker...@vger.kernel.org;
pbonz...@redhat.com; mtosa...@redhat.com; Joerg Roedel
Subject: Re: [v4
Hi Will,
On 29/06/15 11:10, Will Deacon wrote:
Hi Andre,
On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 06:19:53PM +0100, Andre Przywara wrote:
I am tempted to remove shmem, since it's broken:
a) there is no upstream driver, only some out-of-tree uio driver module
in some Github repo
Right, but that's the
On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 4:11 PM, Andre Przywara andre.przyw...@arm.com wrote:
Hi,
On 29/06/15 13:52, Christoffer Dall wrote:
Hi Pavel,
[Please cc the kvm/arm list for such patches according to the
MAINTAINERS file in the future]
On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 12:53:46PM +0300, Pavel Fedin wrote:
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=100661
Bug ID: 100661
Summary: kernel panic in vmx_vcpu_run
Product: Virtualization
Version: unspecified
Kernel Version: 4.1.0+
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
Tree:
Hi,
On 29/06/15 13:52, Christoffer Dall wrote:
Hi Pavel,
[Please cc the kvm/arm list for such patches according to the
MAINTAINERS file in the future]
On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 12:53:46PM +0300, Pavel Fedin wrote:
Some hardware (like Raspberry Pi 2) is capable of running KVM, however lacks
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=100661
--- Comment #1 from Lidong Chen jemmy858...@gmail.com ---
Created attachment 181311
-- https://bugzilla.kernel.org/attachment.cgi?id=181311action=edit
objdump result
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching the assignee of the
On 29/06/15 13:37, Pavel Fedin wrote:
Hello!
Hold on a second. In your cover letter, your saying RPi-2. The RPi-2
doesn't have a GIC at all, so I'd really like to know *how* you end-up
in the GICv2 probe function?
I'm not on RPi-2. I am on some Samsung's proprietary hardware which
Hi Pavel,
[Please cc the kvm/arm list for such patches according to the
MAINTAINERS file in the future]
On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 12:53:46PM +0300, Pavel Fedin wrote:
Some hardware (like Raspberry Pi 2) is capable of running KVM, however lacks
functional vGIC registers. This series introduces
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=100661
--- Comment #2 from Lidong Chen jemmy858...@gmail.com ---
i think the stack is broken.
so the rsi value is error.
vcpu-arch.regs_avail = ~((1 VCPU_REGS_RIP) | (1 VCPU_REGS_RSP)
bf8d: 48 8b 75 98 mov
Hello!
Hold on a second. In your cover letter, your saying RPi-2. The RPi-2
doesn't have a GIC at all, so I'd really like to know *how* you end-up
in the GICv2 probe function?
I'm not on RPi-2. I am on some Samsung's proprietary hardware which suffers
from this problem.
Actually it has
-Original Message-
From: Joerg Roedel [mailto:j...@8bytes.org]
Sent: Monday, June 29, 2015 5:23 PM
To: Wu, Feng
Cc: Alex Williamson; Eric Auger; Avi Kivity; kvm@vger.kernel.org;
linux-ker...@vger.kernel.org; pbonz...@redhat.com; mtosa...@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [v4 08/16] KVM:
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=100671
Bug ID: 100671
Summary: vmwrite error in vmx_vcpu_run
Product: Virtualization
Version: unspecified
Kernel Version: 4.1.0+
Hardware: Intel
OS: Linux
Tree:
On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 06:12:17PM +0200, Andrew Jones wrote:
It shouldn't be necessary to use a barrier on the way into
spin_lock. We'll be focused on a single address until we get
it (exclusively) set, and then we'll do a barrier on the way
out. Also, it does make sense to do a barrier on
On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 06:12:18PM +0200, Andrew Jones wrote:
spinlock torture tests made it clear that checking mmu_enabled()
every time we call spin_lock is a bad idea.
why a bad idea? Does it break, is it slow?
As most tests will
want the MMU enabled the entire time, then just hard code
Hi Pavel,
On 29/06/15 10:53, Pavel Fedin wrote:
Some hardware (like Raspberry Pi 2) is capable of running KVM, however lacks
functional vGIC registers. This series introduces software vGIC emulation for
such machines, allowing to fully use virtualization capabilities
I'm really not keen on
On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 09:14:54AM +, Wu, Feng wrote:
Do you mean updating the hardware IRTEs for all the entries in the irq
routing table, no matter whether it is the updated one?
Right, that's what I mean. It seems wrong to me to work around the API
interface by creating a diff between
Two main functions (vgic_get_pending_irq() and vgic_clear_pending_irq())
are responsible for ACK and EOI respectively. Maintenance code path
refactored in order to accommodate these changes. The main problem is that
__kvm_vgic_sync_hwstate() is called before I/O emulation takes place,
therefore
Some hardware (like Raspberry Pi 2) is capable of running KVM, however lacks
functional vGIC registers. This series introduces software vGIC emulation for
such machines, allowing to fully use virtualization capabilities
Pavel Fedin (3):
KVM: arm: Add basic infrastructure for software vGIC
The emulation code is activated by setting params-vcpu_base to zero
Signed-off-by: Pavel Fedin p.fe...@samsung.com
---
include/kvm/arm_vgic.h | 1 +
virt/kvm/arm/vgic-v2-emul.c | 60 -
2 files changed, 55 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git
The emulation code is automatically enabled when one of vGIC resources
is missing from the device tree
Signed-off-by: Pavel Fedin p.fe...@samsung.com
---
virt/kvm/arm/vgic-v2.c | 29 ++---
virt/kvm/arm/vgic.c| 10 ++
2 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 19
On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 10:45:03AM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 08:45:44AM +0100, Andreas Herrmann wrote:
With current code the number of threads added to the thread_pool
equals number of online CPUs. Thus on an OcteonIII cn78xx system we
usually have 48 threads per
Commit 609e36d372ad (KVM: x86: pass host_initiated to functions that
read MSRs) modified kvm_get_msr_common function to use msr_info-data
instead of data but missed one occurrence. Replace it and remove the
unused local variable.
Fixes: 609e36d372ad (KVM: x86: pass host_initiated to functions
On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 08:45:44AM +0100, Andreas Herrmann wrote:
With current code the number of threads added to the thread_pool
equals number of online CPUs. Thus on an OcteonIII cn78xx system we
usually have 48 threads per guest just for the thread_pool. IMHO this
is overkill for guests
With current code the number of threads added to the thread_pool
equals number of online CPUs. So on cn78xx we usually have 48 threads
per guest just for the thread_pool. IMHO this is overkill for guests
that just have a few vCPUs and/or if a guest is pinned to a subset of
host CPUs. E.g.
#
On 29/06/15 10:53, Pavel Fedin wrote:
The emulation code is automatically enabled when one of vGIC resources
is missing from the device tree
Hold on a second. In your cover letter, your saying RPi-2. The RPi-2
doesn't have a GIC at all, so I'd really like to know *how* you end-up
in the GICv2
From: Cornelia Huck cornelia.h...@de.ibm.com
Eric noticed problems with vhost-scsi and virtio-ccw: vhost-scsi
complained about overwriting values in the config space, which
was triggered by a broken implementation of virtio-ccw's config
get/set routines. It was probably sheer luck that we did not
Paolo,
here is fix targetted for kvm/master (4.2) that fixes an issue with
virtio config space on s390. It mostly manifests in vhost-scsi
not working properly on s390. The problem itself might affect other
things as well so cc stable/target 4.2.
@Michael FYI, sending this via Paolo as most
Hi Christoffer,
thanks for your time to reviewing this! Was probably no pleasure ;-)
On 28/06/15 20:12, Christoffer Dall wrote:
On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 10:53:18AM +0100, Andre Przywara wrote:
The ARM GICv3 ITS MSI controller requires a device ID to be able to
assign the proper interrupt
On 29/06/15 15:11, Andre Przywara wrote:
Hi,
On 29/06/15 13:52, Christoffer Dall wrote:
Hi Pavel,
[Please cc the kvm/arm list for such patches according to the
MAINTAINERS file in the future]
On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 12:53:46PM +0300, Pavel Fedin wrote:
Some hardware (like Raspberry Pi
With the advent of GICv3 ITS in-kernel emulation, KVM GSI routing
appears to be requested. More specifically MSI routing is needed.
irqchip routing does not sound to be really useful on arm but usage of
MSI routing also mandates to integrate irqchip routing. The initial
implementation of irqfd on
On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 06:41:24PM +0800, Zhichao Huang wrote:
Hardware debugging in guests is not intercepted currently, it means
that a malicious guest can bring down the entire machine by writing
to the debug registers.
This patch enable trapping of all debug registers, preventing the
On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 03:53:12PM +0100, Andre Przywara wrote:
Hi Christoffer,
thanks for your time to reviewing this! Was probably no pleasure ;-)
On 28/06/15 20:12, Christoffer Dall wrote:
On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 10:53:18AM +0100, Andre Przywara wrote:
The ARM GICv3 ITS MSI
On Mon, 2015-06-29 at 13:27 +, Wu, Feng wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Alex Williamson [mailto:alex.william...@redhat.com]
Sent: Friday, June 19, 2015 4:04 AM
To: Wu, Feng
Cc: Eric Auger; Avi Kivity; kvm@vger.kernel.org;
linux-ker...@vger.kernel.org;
If the ITS modality is not available, let's simply support MSI
injection by transforming the MSI.data into an SPI ID.
This becomes possible to use KVM_SIGNAL_MSI ioctl for arm too.
Signed-off-by: Eric Auger eric.au...@linaro.org
---
arch/arm/kvm/Kconfig | 1 +
virt/kvm/arm/vgic.c | 5 +
2
on ARM, a devid field is conveyed in kvm_msi struct. Let's choose the
routing type and struct according to its availability and fill the
corresponding struct. Also remove the flag check now this latter can
be non null.
Signed-off-by: Eric Auger eric.au...@linaro.org
---
virt/kvm/irqchip.c | 18
This patch adds compilation and link against irqchip.
On ARM, irqchip routing is not really useful since there is
a single irqchip. However main motivation behind using irqchip
code is to enable MSI routing code. With the support of in-kernel
GICv3 ITS emulation, it now seems to be a MUST HAVE
Implement a default routing table made of flat irqchip routing
entries (gsi = irqchip.pin) covering the VGIC SPI indexes.
This routing table is overwritten by the first user-space call
to KVM_SET_GSI_ROUTING ioctl.
Signed-off-by: Eric Auger eric.au...@linaro.org
---
PATCH: creation
---
Up to now, only irqchip routing entries could be set. This patch
adds the capability to insert MSI routing entries, extended or
standard ones. Although standard MSI entries can be set, their
injection still is not supported. For ARM64, let's also increase
KVM_MAX_IRQ_ROUTES to 4096: include SPI
On ARM, the MSI msg (address and data) comes along with
out-of-band device ID information. The device ID encodes the device
that composes the MSI msg. Let's create a new routing entry type,
dubbed KVM_IRQ_ROUTING_EXTENDED_MSI and use the __u32 pad space
to convey the device ID.
Signed-off-by:
Add a new kvm_extended_msi struct to store the additional device ID
specific to ARM. kvm_kernel_irq_routing_entry union now encompasses
this new struct.
Signed-off-by: Eric Auger eric.au...@linaro.org
---
RFC - PATCH:
- reword the commit message after change in first patch (uapi)
---
On 26.06.2015 06:49, Jan Kiszka wrote:
On 2015-06-25 11:25, Claudio Fontana wrote:
On 25.06.2015 11:10, Peter Maydell wrote:
On 25 June 2015 at 09:59, Claudio Fontana claudio.font...@huawei.com
wrote:
Once the VM is created, I think QEMU should not request kvm to
change the virtual offset
On 29 June 2015 at 18:20, Claudio Fontana claudio.font...@huawei.com wrote:
On 26.06.2015 06:49, Jan Kiszka wrote:
QEMU has the concept of write-back levels: KVM_PUT_RUNTIME_STATE,
KVM_PUT_RESET_STATE and KVM_PUT_FULL_STATE. I suspect this registers is
just sorted into the wrong category, thus
On 29 June 2015 at 18:30, Marc Zyngier marc.zyng...@arm.com wrote:
On 29/06/15 18:13, Chalamarla, Tirumalesh wrote:
Will this also prevents migrating between same implementations,
if no how is this identified.
This shouldn't. It is pretty easy to look at the incoming guest's MIDR,
and verify
On 29/06/15 18:38, Peter Maydell wrote:
On 29 June 2015 at 18:30, Marc Zyngier marc.zyng...@arm.com wrote:
On 29/06/15 18:13, Chalamarla, Tirumalesh wrote:
Will this also prevents migrating between same implementations,
if no how is this identified.
This shouldn't. It is pretty easy to look
On 29/06/15 18:13, Chalamarla, Tirumalesh wrote:
On Jun 26, 2015, at 2:53 AM, Christoffer Dall christoffer.d...@linaro.org
wrote:
On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 02:49:08PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
On 25 June 2015 at 14:44, Marc Zyngier marc.zyng...@arm.com wrote:
It should always be possible
Hi Andre,
On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 06:19:53PM +0100, Andre Przywara wrote:
I am tempted to remove shmem, since it's broken:
a) there is no upstream driver, only some out-of-tree uio driver module
in some Github repo
Right, but that's the same for qemu and we've already made the jump of
merging
bugzilla-dae...@bugzilla.kernel.org writes:
Can you please provide a little bit more information ?
When does the write error happen and what guest/host are you running ?
If it's a regression, would it be possible for you to bisect it ?
Is Bug 100661 related to the same hardware ?
Bandan
On Jun 29, 2015, at 10:52 AM, Marc Zyngier marc.zyng...@arm.com wrote:
On 29/06/15 18:38, Peter Maydell wrote:
On 29 June 2015 at 18:30, Marc Zyngier marc.zyng...@arm.com wrote:
On 29/06/15 18:13, Chalamarla, Tirumalesh wrote:
Will this also prevents migrating between same implementations,
On Jun 26, 2015, at 2:53 AM, Christoffer Dall christoffer.d...@linaro.org
wrote:
On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 02:49:08PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
On 25 June 2015 at 14:44, Marc Zyngier marc.zyng...@arm.com wrote:
It should always be possible to emulate a known CPU on a generic host,
and it
On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 06:41:29PM +0800, Zhichao Huang wrote:
Add handlers for all the 32-bit debug registers.
Signed-off-by: Zhichao Huang zhichao.hu...@linaro.org
---
arch/arm/include/asm/kvm_asm.h | 12
arch/arm/include/asm/kvm_host.h | 3 +
arch/arm/kernel/asm-offsets.c |
With current code the number of threads added to the thread_pool
equals number of online CPUs. Thus on an OcteonIII cn78xx system we
usually have 48 threads per guest just for the thread_pool. IMHO this
is overkill for guests that just have a few vCPUs and/or if a guest is
pinned to a subset of
tcegrp will be NULL and kfree() can handle this just fine
The affected function did not show this API knowledge, did it?
(is not it the whole point of this patchset
- remove the check and just call kfree() even if the pointer is NULL?).
Partly, yes.
And if you wanted another label,
I
Two guest memory regions need to be defined and two mem= parameters
need to be passed to guest kernel to support more than 256 MB.
Signed-off-by: Andreas Herrmann andreas.herrm...@caviumnetworks.com
---
mips/include/kvm/kvm-arch.h | 10 ++
mips/kvm.c | 36
Hello,
My host is an x86-64 with EPT enabled, my guest is 32b.
I'd like to observe all read accesses to a kernel guest page. I thought of
mapping this page unreadable, and then monitor tdp_page_fault() to catch
accesses to the interesting guest page.
According to the Intel manual (Table 28-6,
-Original Message-
From: Joerg Roedel [mailto:j...@8bytes.org]
Sent: Monday, June 29, 2015 5:06 PM
To: Wu, Feng
Cc: Alex Williamson; Eric Auger; Avi Kivity; kvm@vger.kernel.org;
linux-ker...@vger.kernel.org; pbonz...@redhat.com; mtosa...@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [v4 08/16] KVM:
Hi Feng,
On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 09:11:52AM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
So the trouble is that QEMU vfio updates a single MSI vector, but that
just updates a single entry within a whole table of routes, then the
whole table is pushed to KVM. But in kvm_set_irq_routing() we have
access to
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=100671
--- Comment #2 from Lidong Chen jemmy858...@gmail.com ---
When does the write error happen and what guest/host are you running ?
this error happen when the guest os is booting.
the guest os kernel verison is also 4.1.0+.
If it's a regression,
On 06/29/2015 04:02 PM, SF Markus Elfring wrote:
tcegrp will be NULL and kfree() can handle this just fine
The affected function did not show this API knowledge, did it?
but you fixed this in 1/2 :)
(is not it the whole point of this patchset
- remove the check and just call kfree()
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=100671
Bandan Das b...@makefile.in changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||b...@makefile.in
---
On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 06:41:27PM +0800, Zhichao Huang wrote:
As we're about to trap a bunch of CP14 registers, let's rework
the CP15 handling so it can be generalized and work with multiple
tables.
Signed-off-by: Zhichao Huang zhichao.hu...@linaro.org
---
arch/arm/kvm/coproc.c
62 matches
Mail list logo
