On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 04:22:22PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
>
>
> On 09/01/2015 02:54 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 12:47:36PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
> >>
> >> On 09/01/2015 12:31 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> >>> On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 11:33:43AM +0800, Jason Wan
On 09/01/2015 02:54 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 12:47:36PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
>>
>> On 09/01/2015 12:31 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>>> On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 11:33:43AM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
On 08/31/2015 07:33 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On M
On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 12:47:36PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
>
>
> On 09/01/2015 12:31 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 11:33:43AM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
> >>
> >> On 08/31/2015 07:33 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> >>> On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 04:03:59PM +0800, Jason Wan
On 09/01/2015 12:31 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 11:33:43AM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
>>
>> On 08/31/2015 07:33 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>>> On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 04:03:59PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
>
> On 08/31/2015 03:29 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>>>
On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 11:33:43AM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
>
>
> On 08/31/2015 07:33 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 04:03:59PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On 08/31/2015 03:29 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> >>> > > Thinking more about this,
On 08/31/2015 07:33 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 04:03:59PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > On 08/31/2015 03:29 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>>> > > Thinking more about this, invoking the 0-length write after
>>> > > > >> > the != 0 length
On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 04:03:59PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
>
>
> On 08/31/2015 03:29 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > Thinking more about this, invoking the 0-length write after
> > > >> > the != 0 length one would be better: it would mean we only
> > > >> > handle the userspace MMI
On 08/31/2015 03:29 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> Thinking more about this, invoking the 0-length write after
> > >> > the != 0 length one would be better: it would mean we only
> > >> > handle the userspace MMIO like this.
>>> > > Right.
>>> > >
>> >
>> > Using current unittest. T
On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 11:12:07AM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
>
>
> On 08/26/2015 01:10 PM, Jason Wang wrote:
> > On 08/25/2015 07:51 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> >> > On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 05:05:47PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
> >> > We register wildcard mmio eventfd on two buses, one for
On 08/26/2015 01:10 PM, Jason Wang wrote:
> On 08/25/2015 07:51 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>> > On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 05:05:47PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
>> > We register wildcard mmio eventfd on two buses, one for KVM_MMIO_BUS
>> > and another is KVM_FAST_MMIO_BUS. This leads to i
On 08/25/2015 07:51 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 05:05:47PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
>> > We register wildcard mmio eventfd on two buses, one for KVM_MMIO_BUS
>> > and another is KVM_FAST_MMIO_BUS. This leads to issue:
>> >
>> > - kvm_io_bus_destroy() knows nothing abo
On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 05:05:47PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
> We register wildcard mmio eventfd on two buses, one for KVM_MMIO_BUS
> and another is KVM_FAST_MMIO_BUS. This leads to issue:
>
> - kvm_io_bus_destroy() knows nothing about the devices on two buses
> points to a single dev. Which will
On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 05:05:47PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
> We register wildcard mmio eventfd on two buses, one for KVM_MMIO_BUS
> and another is KVM_FAST_MMIO_BUS. This leads to issue:
>
> - kvm_io_bus_destroy() knows nothing about the devices on two buses
> points to a single dev. Which will
On Tue, 25 Aug 2015 17:05:47 +0800
Jason Wang wrote:
> We register wildcard mmio eventfd on two buses, one for KVM_MMIO_BUS
> and another is KVM_FAST_MMIO_BUS. This leads to issue:
>
> - kvm_io_bus_destroy() knows nothing about the devices on two buses
> points to a single dev. Which will lead
We register wildcard mmio eventfd on two buses, one for KVM_MMIO_BUS
and another is KVM_FAST_MMIO_BUS. This leads to issue:
- kvm_io_bus_destroy() knows nothing about the devices on two buses
points to a single dev. Which will lead double free [1] during exit.
- wildcard eventfd ignores data len
15 matches
Mail list logo