On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 02:12:42PM +0800, Sheng Yang wrote:
On Thursday 24 February 2011 18:17:34 Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 05:44:20PM +0800, Sheng Yang wrote:
On Wednesday 23 February 2011 16:45:37 Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 02:59:04PM
On Wednesday 23 February 2011 16:45:37 Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 02:59:04PM +0800, Sheng Yang wrote:
On Wednesday 23 February 2011 08:19:21 Alex Williamson wrote:
On Sun, 2011-01-30 at 13:11 +0800, Sheng Yang wrote:
Then we can support mask bit operation of
On Wednesday 23 February 2011 16:45:37 Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 02:59:04PM +0800, Sheng Yang wrote:
On Wednesday 23 February 2011 08:19:21 Alex Williamson wrote:
On Sun, 2011-01-30 at 13:11 +0800, Sheng Yang wrote:
Then we can support mask bit operation of
On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 04:08:22PM +0800, Sheng Yang wrote:
On Wednesday 23 February 2011 16:45:37 Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 02:59:04PM +0800, Sheng Yang wrote:
On Wednesday 23 February 2011 08:19:21 Alex Williamson wrote:
On Sun, 2011-01-30 at 13:11 +0800, Sheng
On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 05:44:20PM +0800, Sheng Yang wrote:
On Wednesday 23 February 2011 16:45:37 Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 02:59:04PM +0800, Sheng Yang wrote:
On Wednesday 23 February 2011 08:19:21 Alex Williamson wrote:
On Sun, 2011-01-30 at 13:11 +0800, Sheng
On Thursday 24 February 2011 18:11:44 Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 04:08:22PM +0800, Sheng Yang wrote:
On Wednesday 23 February 2011 16:45:37 Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 02:59:04PM +0800, Sheng Yang wrote:
On Wednesday 23 February 2011 08:19:21
On Thursday 24 February 2011 18:17:34 Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 05:44:20PM +0800, Sheng Yang wrote:
On Wednesday 23 February 2011 16:45:37 Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 02:59:04PM +0800, Sheng Yang wrote:
On Wednesday 23 February 2011 08:19:21
On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 02:59:04PM +0800, Sheng Yang wrote:
On Wednesday 23 February 2011 08:19:21 Alex Williamson wrote:
On Sun, 2011-01-30 at 13:11 +0800, Sheng Yang wrote:
Then we can support mask bit operation of assigned devices now.
Looks pretty good overall. A few comments
On Wed, 2011-02-23 at 14:59 +0800, Sheng Yang wrote:
On Wednesday 23 February 2011 08:19:21 Alex Williamson wrote:
On Sun, 2011-01-30 at 13:11 +0800, Sheng Yang wrote:
+static int msix_table_mmio_read(struct kvm_io_device *this, gpa_t addr,
int len, +void
On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 09:34:19AM -0700, Alex Williamson wrote:
On Wed, 2011-02-23 at 14:59 +0800, Sheng Yang wrote:
On Wednesday 23 February 2011 08:19:21 Alex Williamson wrote:
On Sun, 2011-01-30 at 13:11 +0800, Sheng Yang wrote:
+static int msix_table_mmio_read(struct kvm_io_device
On Wed, 2011-02-23 at 20:39 +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 09:34:19AM -0700, Alex Williamson wrote:
On Wed, 2011-02-23 at 14:59 +0800, Sheng Yang wrote:
On Wednesday 23 February 2011 08:19:21 Alex Williamson wrote:
On Sun, 2011-01-30 at 13:11 +0800, Sheng Yang
On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 04:15:38PM +0800, Sheng Yang wrote:
Why allow this ioctl to succeed if there's an entry already present?
This case is broken as mmio_dev-mmio_nr is increased below.
Oh, It's a bug to let mmio_nr increase even with MMIO found. I've fixed it.
The reason we allow
On Sun, 2011-01-30 at 13:11 +0800, Sheng Yang wrote:
Then we can support mask bit operation of assigned devices now.
Looks pretty good overall. A few comments below. It seems like we
should be able to hook this into vfio with a small stub in kvm. We just
need to be able to communicate
On Wednesday 23 February 2011 08:19:21 Alex Williamson wrote:
On Sun, 2011-01-30 at 13:11 +0800, Sheng Yang wrote:
Then we can support mask bit operation of assigned devices now.
Looks pretty good overall. A few comments below. It seems like we
should be able to hook this into vfio with a
On Thursday 03 February 2011 09:05:55 Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
On Sun, Jan 30, 2011 at 01:11:15PM +0800, Sheng Yang wrote:
Then we can support mask bit operation of assigned devices now.
Signed-off-by: Sheng Yang sh...@linux.intel.com
+int kvm_vm_ioctl_register_msix_mmio(struct kvm
On Sun, Jan 30, 2011 at 01:11:15PM +0800, Sheng Yang wrote:
Then we can support mask bit operation of assigned devices now.
Signed-off-by: Sheng Yang sh...@linux.intel.com
+int kvm_vm_ioctl_register_msix_mmio(struct kvm *kvm,
+ struct kvm_msix_mmio_user
On 01/30/2011 06:38 AM, Sheng Yang wrote:
(Sorry, missed this mail...)
On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 02:29:44PM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 01/06/2011 12:19 PM, Sheng Yang wrote:
Then we can support mask bit operation of assigned devices now.
+int
On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 03:09:09PM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 01/30/2011 06:38 AM, Sheng Yang wrote:
(Sorry, missed this mail...)
On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 02:29:44PM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 01/06/2011 12:19 PM, Sheng Yang wrote:
Then we can support mask bit operation of assigned
(Sorry, missed this mail...)
On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 02:29:44PM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 01/06/2011 12:19 PM, Sheng Yang wrote:
Then we can support mask bit operation of assigned devices now.
+int kvm_assigned_device_update_msix_mask_bit(struct kvm *kvm,
+
On Monday 17 January 2011 20:39:30 Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 08:18:22PM +0800, Sheng Yang wrote:
+ goto out;
+
+ mmio = mmio_dev-mmio[idx];
+ entry = (addr - mmio-table_base_addr) / PCI_MSIX_ENTRY_SIZE;
+ entry_base =
On Thu, Jan 06, 2011 at 06:19:44PM +0800, Sheng Yang wrote:
Then we can support mask bit operation of assigned devices now.
Signed-off-by: Sheng Yang sh...@linux.intel.com
---
arch/x86/kvm/Makefile|2 +-
arch/x86/kvm/x86.c |8 +-
include/linux/kvm.h | 21
On Monday 17 January 2011 19:54:47 Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
On Thu, Jan 06, 2011 at 06:19:44PM +0800, Sheng Yang wrote:
Then we can support mask bit operation of assigned devices now.
Signed-off-by: Sheng Yang sh...@linux.intel.com
---
arch/x86/kvm/Makefile|2 +-
On 01/17/2011 02:18 PM, Sheng Yang wrote:
+
+ if (copy_to_user((void __user *)(entry_base + offset), val, len))
+ goto out;
Instead of copying to/from userspace (which is subject to swapin,
unexpected values), you could include the guest written value in a
kvm_run
On 01/06/2011 12:19 PM, Sheng Yang wrote:
Then we can support mask bit operation of assigned devices now.
+int kvm_assigned_device_update_msix_mask_bit(struct kvm *kvm,
+ int assigned_dev_id, int entry, bool mask)
+{
+ int r = -EFAULT;
+ struct
On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 08:18:22PM +0800, Sheng Yang wrote:
+ goto out;
+
+ mmio = mmio_dev-mmio[idx];
+ entry = (addr - mmio-table_base_addr) / PCI_MSIX_ENTRY_SIZE;
+ entry_base = mmio-table_base_va + entry * PCI_MSIX_ENTRY_SIZE;
+ ctrl_pos = (u32 *)(entry_base +
On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 02:18:43PM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 01/17/2011 02:18 PM, Sheng Yang wrote:
+
+ if (copy_to_user((void __user *)(entry_base + offset), val,
len))
+ goto out;
Instead of copying to/from userspace (which is subject to swapin,
On 01/17/2011 02:48 PM, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 02:18:43PM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 01/17/2011 02:18 PM, Sheng Yang wrote:
+
+ if (copy_to_user((void __user *)(entry_base + offset), val,
len))
+ goto out;
Instead of
On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 02:29:44PM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 01/06/2011 12:19 PM, Sheng Yang wrote:
Then we can support mask bit operation of assigned devices now.
+int kvm_assigned_device_update_msix_mask_bit(struct kvm *kvm,
+int assigned_dev_id, int
On 2011-01-17 13:29, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 01/06/2011 12:19 PM, Sheng Yang wrote:
Then we can support mask bit operation of assigned devices now.
+int kvm_assigned_device_update_msix_mask_bit(struct kvm *kvm,
+int assigned_dev_id, int entry, bool mask)
+{
+int r =
On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 02:51:37PM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 01/17/2011 02:48 PM, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 02:18:43PM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 01/17/2011 02:18 PM, Sheng Yang wrote:
+
+if (copy_to_user((void __user *)(entry_base + offset),
On 01/17/2011 05:52 PM, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
What a value is written by the guest, which kvm cannot handle itself
(i.e. a change to anything other than the mask bit), we exit with
the table and entry ids, so userspace can reread them.
OK. But regarding access to the MSI-X entry in
31 matches
Mail list logo
