Hi Zengtao,
On 2020-04-16 02:38, Zengtao (B) wrote:
Hi Marc:
Got it.
Really a bit patch set :)
Well, yeah... ;-)
BTW, I have done a basic kvm unit test
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/virt/kvm/kvm-unit-tests.git
And I find that after apply the patch KVM: arm64: VNCR-ize ELR_EL1,
The psci
On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 03:59:39PM +0100, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
> On 04/14/2020 10:31 PM, Will Deacon wrote:
> > Now that Suzuki isn't within throwing distance, I thought I'd better add
> > a rough overview comment to cpufeature.c so that it doesn't take me days
> > to remember how it works next
On 2020-04-16 18:05, Will Deacon wrote:
On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 04:36:05PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
On Wed, 15 Apr 2020 18:57:46 +0800
Zenghui Yu wrote:
> The only user of PTE_S2_MEMATTR_MASK macro had been removed since
> commit a501e32430d4 ("arm64: Clean up the default pgprot setting").
On 2020-04-16 02:17, Zenghui Yu wrote:
On 2020/4/14 11:03, Zenghui Yu wrote:
If we're going to fail out the vgic_add_lpi(), let's make sure the
allocated vgic_irq memory is also freed. Though it seems that both
cases are unlikely to fail.
Cc: Zengruan Ye
Signed-off-by: Zenghui Yu
---
On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 04:36:05PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Apr 2020 18:57:46 +0800
> Zenghui Yu wrote:
>
> > The only user of PTE_S2_MEMATTR_MASK macro had been removed since
> > commit a501e32430d4 ("arm64: Clean up the default pgprot setting").
> > It has been about six years
On 16/04/20 17:09, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Apr 2020 18:13:56 +0200
> Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>
>> On 13/04/20 14:20, Keqian Zhu wrote:
>>> There is already support of enabling dirty log graually in small chunks
>>> for x86 in commit 3c9bd4006bfc ("KVM: x86: enable dirty log gradually in
On Wed, 15 Apr 2020 18:57:46 +0800
Zenghui Yu wrote:
> The only user of PTE_S2_MEMATTR_MASK macro had been removed since
> commit a501e32430d4 ("arm64: Clean up the default pgprot setting").
> It has been about six years and no one has used it again.
>
> Let's drop it.
>
> Signed-off-by:
On 2020-04-16 15:59, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
Hi Suzuki,
[...]
As you mentioned in the other response we could add information about
the guest view, something like :
- KVM exposes the sanitised value of the feature registers to the
guests and is not affected by the FTR_VISIBLE.
On Wed, 15 Apr 2020 18:13:56 +0200
Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 13/04/20 14:20, Keqian Zhu wrote:
> > There is already support of enabling dirty log graually in small chunks
> > for x86 in commit 3c9bd4006bfc ("KVM: x86: enable dirty log gradually in
> > small chunks"). This adds support for arm64.
On Mon, 13 Apr 2020 20:20:23 +0800
Keqian Zhu wrote:
> There is already support of enabling dirty log graually in small chunks
gradually
> for x86 in commit 3c9bd4006bfc ("KVM: x86: enable dirty log gradually in
> small chunks"). This adds support for arm64.
>
> x86 still writes protect all
Hi Will,
On 04/14/2020 10:31 PM, Will Deacon wrote:
Now that Suzuki isn't within throwing distance, I thought I'd better add
a rough overview comment to cpufeature.c so that it doesn't take me days
to remember how it works next time.
Signed-off-by: Will Deacon
---
On 16/04/20 07:10, Tianjia Zhang wrote:
> In earlier versions of kvm, 'kvm_run' is an independent structure
> and is not included in the vcpu structure. At present, 'kvm_run'
> is already included in the vcpu structure, so the parameter
> 'kvm_run' is redundant.
>
> This patch simplify the
Hi Geng,
On 16/04/2020 13:07, gengdongjiu wrote:
> On 2020/4/14 20:18, James Morse wrote:
>> On 11/04/2020 13:17, Dongjiu Geng wrote:
>>> When the RAS Extension is implemented, b0b011000, 0b011100,
>>> 0b011101, 0b00, and 0b01, are not used and reserved
>>> to the DFSC[5:0] of ESR_ELx,
Hi James
On 2020/4/14 20:18, James Morse wrote:
> Hi Geng,
>
> On 11/04/2020 13:17, Dongjiu Geng wrote:
>> When the RAS Extension is implemented, b0b011000, 0b011100,
>> 0b011101, 0b00, and 0b01, are not used and reserved
>> to the DFSC[5:0] of ESR_ELx, but the code still checks these
>>
Hi Suzuki,
On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 10:31:14PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> Now that Suzuki isn't within throwing distance, I thought I'd better add
> a rough overview comment to cpufeature.c so that it doesn't take me days
> to remember how it works next time.
>
> Signed-off-by: Will Deacon
>
On 2020/4/16 16:28, Marc Zyngier wrote:
On 2020-04-16 08:03, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
Tianjia Zhang writes:
In earlier versions of kvm, 'kvm_run' is an independent structure
and is not included in the vcpu structure. At present, 'kvm_run'
is already included in the vcpu structure, so the
On 2020/4/16 16:50, Cornelia Huck wrote:
On Thu, 16 Apr 2020 16:45:33 +0800
Tianjia Zhang wrote:
On 2020/4/16 16:28, Marc Zyngier wrote:
On 2020-04-16 08:03, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
Tianjia Zhang writes:
In earlier versions of kvm, 'kvm_run' is an independent structure
and is not
On 2020/4/14 下午11:05, Eric Auger wrote:
This version fixes an issue observed by Shameer on an SMMU 3.2,
when moving from dual stage config to stage 1 only config.
The 2 high 64b of the STE now get reset. Otherwise, leaving the
S2TTB set may cause a C_BAD_STE error.
This series can be found
Tianjia Zhang writes:
> In earlier versions of kvm, 'kvm_run' is an independent structure
> and is not included in the vcpu structure. At present, 'kvm_run'
> is already included in the vcpu structure, so the parameter
> 'kvm_run' is redundant.
>
> This patch simplify the function definition,
Hi Marc:
Got it.
Really a bit patch set :)
BTW, I have done a basic kvm unit test
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/virt/kvm/kvm-unit-tests.git
And I find that after apply the patch KVM: arm64: VNCR-ize ELR_EL1,
The psci test failed for some reason, I can't understand why, this
is only the test
On 2020/4/15 22:53, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
On 15/04/20 11:07, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
In case this is no longer needed I'd suggest we drop 'kvm_run' parameter
and extract it from 'struct kvm_vcpu' when needed. This looks like a
natural add-on to your cleanup patch.
I agree, though I think it
In earlier versions of kvm, 'kvm_run' is an independent structure
and is not included in the vcpu structure. At present, 'kvm_run'
is already included in the vcpu structure, so the parameter
'kvm_run' is redundant.
This patch simplify the function definition, removes the extra
'kvm_run'
Hi Mark,
On 4/14/20 9:05 PM, Mark Rutland wrote:
On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 03:39:56PM +1000, Gavin Shan wrote:
On 4/10/20 10:52 PM, Marc Zyngier wrote:
On 2020-04-10 09:58, Gavin Shan wrote:
In order to fulfil the control flow and convey signals between host
and guest. A IMPDEF system register
On 2020-04-16 14:09, Sai Prakash Ranjan wrote:
On 2020-04-15 03:01, Will Deacon wrote:
Hi all,
For better or worse, there are SoCs in production where some, but not
all of the CPUs, support AArch32 at EL1 and above. Right now, that
results in "SANITY CHECK" warnings during boot and an
On 2020-04-15 03:01, Will Deacon wrote:
Hi all,
For better or worse, there are SoCs in production where some, but not
all of the CPUs, support AArch32 at EL1 and above. Right now, that
results in "SANITY CHECK" warnings during boot and an unconditional
kernel taint.
This patch series tries to
On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 10:16:22AM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 05:59:33PM +1000, Gavin Shan wrote:
> > However, the hypercall number and behaviors are guarded by
> > specification. For example, the hypercalls used by para-virtualized
> > stolen time, which are defined in
On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 05:59:33PM +1000, Gavin Shan wrote:
> On 4/14/20 9:05 PM, Mark Rutland wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 03:39:56PM +1000, Gavin Shan wrote:
> > > On 4/10/20 10:52 PM, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> > > > On 2020-04-10 09:58, Gavin Shan wrote:
> > > > > In order to fulfil the
On 2020-04-16 09:45, Tianjia Zhang wrote:
On 2020/4/16 16:28, Marc Zyngier wrote:
[...]
Overall, there is a large set of cleanups to be done when both the
vcpu and the run
structures are passed as parameters at the same time. Just grepping
the tree for
kvm_run is pretty instructive.
On Thu, 16 Apr 2020 16:45:33 +0800
Tianjia Zhang wrote:
> On 2020/4/16 16:28, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> > On 2020-04-16 08:03, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
> >> Tianjia Zhang writes:
> >>
> >>> In earlier versions of kvm, 'kvm_run' is an independent structure
> >>> and is not included in the vcpu
On 2020-04-16 08:03, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
Tianjia Zhang writes:
In earlier versions of kvm, 'kvm_run' is an independent structure
and is not included in the vcpu structure. At present, 'kvm_run'
is already included in the vcpu structure, so the parameter
'kvm_run' is redundant.
This patch
On Thu, 16 Apr 2020 13:10:57 +0800
Tianjia Zhang wrote:
> In earlier versions of kvm, 'kvm_run' is an independent structure
> and is not included in the vcpu structure. At present, 'kvm_run'
> is already included in the vcpu structure, so the parameter
> 'kvm_run' is redundant.
>
> This patch
Hi Zhangfei,
On 4/16/20 6:25 AM, Zhangfei Gao wrote:
>
>
> On 2020/4/14 下午11:05, Eric Auger wrote:
>> This version fixes an issue observed by Shameer on an SMMU 3.2,
>> when moving from dual stage config to stage 1 only config.
>> The 2 high 64b of the STE now get reset. Otherwise, leaving the
32 matches
Mail list logo
