Re: [PATCH v1] kvm: Make vcpu->requests as 64 bit bitmap

On Thu, Dec 24, 2015 at 12:30:26PM +0300, Andrey Smetanin wrote: > Currently on x86 arch we has already 32 requests defined > so the newer request bits can't be placed inside > vcpu->requests(unsigned long) inside x86 32 bit system. > But we are going to add a new request in x86 arch > for Hyper-V

Re: [PATCH v1] kvm: Make vcpu->requests as 64 bit bitmap

On Thu, Dec 24, 2015 at 12:30:26PM +0300, Andrey Smetanin wrote: > Currently on x86 arch we has already 32 requests defined > so the newer request bits can't be placed inside > vcpu->requests(unsigned long) inside x86 32 bit system. > But we are going to add a new request in x86 arch > for Hyper-V

Re: [PATCH v1 1/2] kvm/x86: Hyper-V SynIC tracepoints

l.org> > CC: Paolo Bonzini <pbonz...@redhat.com> > CC: Roman Kagan <rka...@virtuozzo.com> > CC: Denis V. Lunev <d...@openvz.org> > CC: qemu-de...@nongnu.org > --- > arch/x86/kvm/hyperv.c | 10 +++--- > arch/x86/kvm/trace.h | 93 > +++

Re: [PATCH v2] kvm: Make vcpu->requests as 64 bit bitmap

echle <r...@linux-mips.org> > CC: Alexander Graf <ag...@suse.com> > CC: Christian Borntraeger <borntrae...@de.ibm.com> > CC: Cornelia Huck <cornelia.h...@de.ibm.com> > CC: linux-m...@linux-mips.org > CC: kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org > CC: linux-s...@vger.kernel.org > CC: R

Re: [PATCH v2] kvm: Make vcpu->requests as 64 bit bitmap

echle <r...@linux-mips.org> > CC: Alexander Graf <ag...@suse.com> > CC: Christian Borntraeger <borntrae...@de.ibm.com> > CC: Cornelia Huck <cornelia.h...@de.ibm.com> > CC: linux-m...@linux-mips.org > CC: kvm-...@vger.kernel.org > CC: linux-s...@vger.kernel.org > CC: R

Re: [PATCH v1 2/2] kvm/x86: Hyper-V SynIC timers tracepoints

tup > * timer cleanup > > Signed-off-by: Andrey Smetanin <asmeta...@virtuozzo.com> > CC: Gleb Natapov <g...@kernel.org> > CC: Paolo Bonzini <pbonz...@redhat.com> > CC: Roman Kagan <rka...@virtuozzo.com> > CC: Denis V. Lunev <d...@openvz.org> > CC:

Re: [RFC PATCH 2/5] KVM: add KVM_EXIT_MSR exit reason and capability.

On Tue, Dec 22, 2015 at 10:24:13AM +0300, Pavel Fedin wrote: > > +On the return path into kvm, user space should set handled to > > +KVM_EXIT_MSR_HANDLED if it successfully handled the MSR access. Otherwise, > > +handled should be set to KVM_EXIT_MSR_UNHANDLED, which will cause a general > >

Re: [RFC PATCH 2/5] KVM: add KVM_EXIT_MSR exit reason and capability.

On Tue, Dec 22, 2015 at 03:51:52PM +0300, Pavel Fedin wrote: > Hello! > > > > 1. Is there any real need to distinguish between KVM_EXIT_MSR_WRITE and > > KVM_EXIT_MSR_AFTER_WRITE ? IMHO from userland's point of view these are the > > same. > > > > Indeed. Perhaps the kernel can set .handled

Re: [PATCH v4 5/5] kvm/x86: Hyper-V kvm exit

On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 06:19:25PM +0300, Pavel Fedin wrote: > I dislike implementing architecture-dependent exit code where we could > implement an architecture-independent one. > > As far as i understand this code, KVM_EXIT_HYPERV is called when one of > three MSRs are accessed. But,

Re: [PATCH v4 5/5] kvm/x86: Hyper-V kvm exit

On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 05:01:59PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > On 18/12/2015 16:19, Pavel Fedin wrote: > > As far as i understand this code, KVM_EXIT_HYPERV is called when one > > of three MSRs are accessed. But, shouldn't we have implemented > > instead something more generic, like

Re: [PATCH v4 5/5] kvm/x86: Hyper-V kvm exit

On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 10:10:11AM -0800, Peter Hornyack wrote: > On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 8:01 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > On 18/12/2015 16:19, Pavel Fedin wrote: > >> As far as i understand this code, KVM_EXIT_HYPERV is called when one > >> of three MSRs are accessed. But,

Re: [PATCH v1 7/7] kvm/x86: Hyper-V SynIC timers

On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 11:49:40AM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote: [ sorry missed your message on Friday, replying now ] > On 27/11/2015 09:12, Roman Kagan wrote: > >> > +n = div64_u64(time_now - stimer->exp_time, stimer->count) + 1; > >> > +stim

Re: [PATCH v1 7/7] kvm/x86: Hyper-V SynIC timers

> > CC: Paolo Bonzini <pbonz...@redhat.com> > CC: "K. Y. Srinivasan" <k...@microsoft.com> > CC: Haiyang Zhang <haiya...@microsoft.com> > CC: Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuzn...@redhat.com> > CC: Roman Kagan <rka...@virtuozzo.com> > CC: Denis V. L

Re: [PATCH v1 6/7] kvm/x86: Hyper-V SynIC message slot pending clearing at SINT ack

yang Zhang <haiya...@microsoft.com> > CC: Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuzn...@redhat.com> > CC: Roman Kagan <rka...@virtuozzo.com> > CC: Denis V. Lunev <d...@openvz.org> > CC: qemu-de...@nongnu.org Reviewed-by: Roman Kagan <rka...@virtuozzo.com> Roman. -- To unsubsc

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 9/9] kvm/x86: Hyper-V kvm exit

On Tue, Nov 03, 2015 at 03:51:16PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > > On 03/11/2015 15:36, Andrey Smetanin wrote: > >> > >> > >> if I run a patched QEMU but I *do not* enable the synthetic interrupt > >> controller. I can fix it by wrapping the calls to synic_exit with "if > >> (!host)", but I

Re: [kvm-unit-tests PATCH] x86: hyperv_synic: Hyper-V SynIC test

t; > > Signed-off-by: Andrey Smetanin <asmeta...@virtuozzo.com> > > Reviewed-by: Roman Kagan <rka...@virtuozzo.com> > > Signed-off-by: Denis V. Lunev <d...@openvz.org> > > CC: Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuzn...@redhat.com> > > CC: "K. Y. Srinivasan&qu

Re: [PATCH v3 8/9] kvm/x86: Hyper-V synthetic interrupt controller

On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 06:41:45PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > Hi Andrey, > > just one question. Is kvm_arch_set_irq actually needed? I think > everything should work fine without it. Can you check? If so, I can > remove it myself and revert the patch that introduced the hook. While Andrey

Re: [PATCH 9/9] kvm/x86: Hyper-V kvm exit

On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 09:51:58AM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > The documentation should include the definition of the struct and the > definition of the subtypes (currently KVM_EXIT_HYPERV_SYNIC only). > > Documentation for KVM_CAP_HYPERV_SINIC and KVM_IRQ_ROUTING_HV_SINT is > missing, too. >

Re: [kvm:queue 27/38] arch/x86/kvm/hyperv.c:186:41: sparse: incorrect type in argument 2 (different modifiers)

On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 03:55:00PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > > On 18/09/2015 15:51, Denis V. Lunev wrote: > >> 185 > >> > 186task_cputime_adjusted(current, , ); > >> 187return div_u64(cputime_to_nsecs(utime + stime), 100); > >> 188} > >> 189 > >>