Re: [PATCH 4/4] pre_init: add ARM implementations

Hi, On 02/03/16 03:00, Will Deacon wrote: > On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 03:33:08PM +, Andre Przywara wrote: >> The pre_init stub consists of two syscalls mouting the host's FS >> via 9pfs and then calling the actual init binary, which can now >> use normal dynamic linking. >> Based on the x86

Re: [PATCH 2/3] MSI-X: update GSI routing after changed MSI-X configuration

Hi, On 02/03/16 01:16, Will Deacon wrote: > On Tue, Mar 01, 2016 at 04:49:37PM +, Andre Przywara wrote: >> When we set up GSI routing to map MSIs to KVM's GSI numbers, we >> write the current device's MSI setup into the kernel routing table. >> However the device driver in the guest can use

Re: [RFC PATCH 12/45] KVM: arm/arm64: vgic-new: Add MMIO handling framework

On 31/03/16 10:08, Christoffer Dall wrote: > Hi Andre, > > [cc'ing Paolo here for his thoughts on the KVM IO bus framework] > > On Fri, Mar 25, 2016 at 02:04:35AM +, Andre Przywara wrote: >> We register each register group of the distributor and redistributors >> as separate regions of the

Re: [RFC PATCH 00/45] KVM: arm/arm64: Rework virtual GIC emulation

On 31/03/16 19:30, Christoffer Dall wrote: > On Fri, Mar 25, 2016 at 02:04:23AM +, Andre Przywara wrote: >> This series is a joint effort to re-implement KVM's GIC emulation. >> >> While the current implementation is centered around providing >> efficient MMIO emulation, the hot path for most

Re: [PATCH 26/45] KVM: arm/arm64: vgic-new: Add GICv3 IDREGS register handler

Hi Peter, thanks for going through the pain of looking into this! On 19/04/16 13:34, Peter Maydell wrote: > On 15 April 2016 at 18:11, Andre Przywara wrote: >> Signed-off-by: Andre Przywara >> --- >> virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic_mmio.c | 21

Re: [RFC v9 0/6] KVM: arm/arm64: gsi routing support

Hi, On 22/07/16 17:20, Eric Auger wrote: > With the advent of GICv3 ITS in-kernel emulation, KVM MSI routing > becomes mandated for proper VIRTIO-PCI vhost integration. > > In QEMU, when the VIRTIO-PCI device is programmed with the MSI message, > we previously used direct_mapping trick: this

Re: [PATCH v10 15/17] KVM: arm64: implement ITS command queue command handlers

Hi Marc, [...] >> +/* >> + * Check whether a device ID can be stored into the guest device tables. >> + * For a direct table this is pretty easy, but gets a bit nasty for >> + * indirect tables. We check whether the resulting guest physical address >> + * is actually valid (covered by a memslot

Re: [PATCH v10 15/17] KVM: arm64: implement ITS command queue command handlers

Hi Marc, On 16/07/16 11:08, Marc Zyngier wrote: > On Fri, 15 Jul 2016 12:43:36 +0100 >> +/* >> + * Check whether a device ID can be stored into the guest device tables. >> + * For a direct table this is pretty easy, but gets a bit nasty for >> + * indirect tables. We check whether the resulting

Re: [PATCH v8 09/17] KVM: arm64: introduce ITS emulation file with MMIO framework

On 08/07/16 14:34, Marc Zyngier wrote: > On 05/07/16 12:23, Andre Przywara wrote: >> The ARM GICv3 ITS emulation code goes into a separate file, but needs >> to be connected to the GICv3 emulation, of which it is an option. >> The ITS MMIO handlers require the respective ITS pointer to be passed

Re: [PATCH v8 06/17] KVM: arm/arm64: VGIC: add refcounting for IRQs

On 08/07/16 14:09, Marc Zyngier wrote: > On 08/07/16 13:54, André Przywara wrote: >> On 08/07/16 11:50, Marc Zyngier wrote: >>> On 08/07/16 11:28, Andre Przywara wrote: >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> On 07/07/16 16:00, Marc Zyngier wrote: >>>>

Re: [PATCH v8 06/17] KVM: arm/arm64: VGIC: add refcounting for IRQs

On 08/07/16 11:50, Marc Zyngier wrote: > On 08/07/16 11:28, Andre Przywara wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On 07/07/16 16:00, Marc Zyngier wrote: >>> On 05/07/16 12:22, Andre Przywara wrote: In the moment our struct vgic_irq's are statically allocated at guest creation time. So getting a pointer to

Re: [PATCH v8 03/17] KVM: extend struct kvm_msi to hold a 32-bit device ID

On 06/07/16 22:06, Christoffer Dall wrote: > On Tue, Jul 05, 2016 at 12:22:55PM +0100, Andre Przywara wrote: >> The ARM GICv3 ITS MSI controller requires a device ID to be able to >> assign the proper interrupt vector. On real hardware, this ID is >> sampled from the bus. To be able to emulate an

Re: [PATCH v8 05/17] KVM: kvm_io_bus: add kvm_io_bus_get_dev() call

Hi Christoffer, On 06/07/16 22:15, Christoffer Dall wrote: > On Tue, Jul 05, 2016 at 12:22:57PM +0100, Andre Przywara wrote: >> The kvm_io_bus framework is a nice place of holding information about >> various MMIO regions for kernel emulated devices. >> Add a call to retrieve the kvm_io_device

Re: [PATCH v8 08/17] KVM: arm64: handle ITS related GICv3 redistributor registers

On 08/07/16 16:40, Christoffer Dall wrote: Hi Christoffer, thanks very much for taking a look! > On Tue, Jul 05, 2016 at 12:23:00PM +0100, Andre Przywara wrote: >> In the GICv3 redistributor there are the PENDBASER and PROPBASER >> registers which we did not emulate so far, as they only make

Re: [PATCH] KVM: arm64: ITS: avoid re-mapping LPIs

On 16/08/16 18:30, Christoffer Dall wrote: > On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 05:51:06PM +0100, Andre Przywara wrote: >> When a guest wants to map a device-ID/event-ID combination that is >> already mapped, we may end up in a situation where an LPI is never >> "put", thus never being freed. >> Since the

Re: [PATCH v8 01/16] FDT: introduce global phandle allocation

Hi Marc, Will, On 09/12/16 12:03, Marc Zyngier wrote: > On 04/11/16 17:31, Andre Przywara wrote: >> Allocating an FDT phandle (a unique identifier) using a static >> variable in a static inline function defined in a header file works >> only if all users are in the same source file. So trying to

Re: [PATCH] KVM: arm/arm64: vgic: Add debugfs vgic-state file

On 20/01/17 20:07, Christoffer Dall wrote Hi Christoffer, > On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 06:07:26PM +, Andre Przywara wrote: >> Hej Christoffer, >> >> On 20/01/17 10:33, Christoffer Dall wrote: >>> Add a file to debugfs to read the in-kernel state of the vgic. We don't >>> do any locking of the

Re: [Qemu-devel] [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v4 09/11] arm/arm64: add initial gicv3 support

On 09/11/16 15:23, Andrew Jones wrote: > On Wed, Nov 09, 2016 at 02:43:53PM +, Andre Przywara wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On 09/11/16 13:08, Andrew Jones wrote: >>> On Wed, Nov 09, 2016 at 12:35:48PM +, Andre Przywara wrote: >>> [...] > diff --git a/lib/arm/asm/gic-v3.h b/lib/arm/asm/gic-v3.h

Re: [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v13 4/4] arm: pmu: Add CPI checking

On 01/12/16 21:18, Christopher Covington wrote: > On 12/01/2016 03:27 PM, Andre Przywara wrote: Hi, >>> + } >>> + avg = sum / NR_SAMPLES; >>> + printf(" sum=%"PRId64" avg=%"PRId64" avg_ipc=%"PRId64" " >>> + "avg_cpi=%"PRId64"\n", sum, avg, i /

Re: [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v13 4/4] arm: pmu: Add CPI checking

On 01/12/16 21:12, Wei Huang wrote: Hi Wei, > On 12/01/2016 02:27 PM, Andre Przywara wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On 01/12/16 05:16, Wei Huang wrote: >>> From: Christopher Covington >>> >>> Calculate the numbers of cycles per instruction (CPI) implied by ARM >>> PMU cycle counter

Re: [PATCH v3 19/19] KVM: arm64: ITS: Pending table save/restore

On 22/03/17 15:12, Auger Eric wrote: > Hi Andre, > > On 20/03/2017 19:21, Andre Przywara wrote: >> Hi Eric, >> >> just fast-forwarded to the end and noticed this one: >> >> >> On 06/03/17 11:34, Eric Auger wrote: >>> Save and restore the pending tables. >>> >>> Pending table restore obviously

Re: [kvmtool PATCH v9 06/15] PCI: Only allocate IRQ routing entry when available

Hi Marc, thanks for having a look! On 29/03/17 09:30, Marc Zyngier wrote: > On 02/02/17 16:32, Andre Przywara wrote: >> If we need to inject an MSI into the guest, we rely at the moment on a >> working GSI MSI routing functionality. However we can get away without >> IRQ routing, if the host

Re: [PATCH kvmtool 6/6] arm: Support non-volatile memory

On 17/12/2018 10:31, Julien Thierry wrote: > Hi, > > On 14/12/2018 18:09, Andre Przywara wrote: >> On Tue, 4 Dec 2018 11:14:33 + >> Julien Thierry wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >>> Add an option to let user load files as non-volatile memory. >>> >>> An additional range of addresses is reserved for nv

Re: [PATCH kvmtool 4/6] arm: Support firmware loading

On 17/12/2018 10:05, Julien Thierry wrote: Hi Julien, > On 14/12/2018 18:08, Andre Przywara wrote: >> On Tue, 4 Dec 2018 11:14:31 + >> Julien Thierry wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >>> Implement firmware image loading for arm and set the boot start >>> address to the firmware address. >>> >>> Add an

Re: [kvmarm:kvm-arm64/nv-wip-v5.0-rc1 4/75] arch/arm/kvm/../../../virt/kvm/arm/arch_timer.c:700:7: error: 'SYS_CNTP_TVAL_EL0' undeclared

On 09/01/2019 04:40, kbuild test robot wrote: Marc, Christoffer, > tree: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/kvmarm/kvmarm.git > kvm-arm64/nv-wip-v5.0-rc1 > head: 688c386ca096f2c1f2eee386697586c88df5d5bc > commit: 2b1265c58a873d917e99ac762e243c1274481dbf [4/75] KVM: arm/arm64:

Re: [PATCH] KVM: arm64: fix potential bug

On 12/03/2019 00:32, John Gong wrote: Hi, > Since intid always >= VGIC_NR_PRIVATE_IRQS, How so? The PMU and the arch timer emulation use PPIs, so intid is definitely < VGIC_NR_PRIVATE_IRQS there. > so then even vcpu == NULL, it never return -EINVAL. I am not sure I follow. To uniquely identify

Re: [PATCH 1/2] KVM: arm/arm64: Add save/restore support for firmware workaround state

On 18/02/2019 09:07, Marc Zyngier wrote: > On Fri, 15 Feb 2019 17:26:02 + > Dave Martin wrote: Hi, > >> On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 11:42:27AM +, Marc Zyngier wrote: >>> On Fri, 15 Feb 2019 09:58:57 +, >>> Andre Przywara wrote: On Wed, 30 Jan 2019 11:39:00 + Andre

Re: [PATCH 12/14] KVM: arm/arm64: arch_timer: Assign the phys timer on VHE systems

On Thu, 24 Jan 2019 15:00:30 +0100 Christoffer Dall wrote: Hi, > VHE systems don't have to emulate the physical timer, we can simply > assigne the EL1 physical timer directly to the VM as the host always > uses the EL2 timers. > > In order to minimize the amount of cruft, AArch32 gets

Re: [PATCH 11/14] KVM: arm/arm64: timer: Rework data structures for multiple timers

On Thu, 24 Jan 2019 15:00:29 +0100 Christoffer Dall wrote: Hi, I already looked at most of these patches earlier, without finding serious issues, but figured I would give those without any Reviewed-by: or Acked-by: tags a closer look. (This patch just carries a S-o-b: tag from Marc in the

Re: [PATCH 09/14] KVM: arm64: Reuse sys_reg() macro when searching the trap table

On Thu, 24 Jan 2019 15:00:27 +0100 Christoffer Dall wrote: Hi, > From: Marc Zyngier > > Instead of having an open-coded macro, reuse the sys_reg() macro > that does the exact same thing. It's not the exact same thing, is it? It looks like being off by 5 bit to me. I think the patch is still

Re: [kvm-unit-tests PATCH 04/10] arm: pmu: Check Required Event Support

On 09/01/2020 16:54, Auger Eric wrote: Hi Eric, > On 1/3/20 7:12 PM, Andre Przywara wrote: >> On Mon, 16 Dec 2019 21:47:51 +0100 >> Eric Auger wrote: >> >> Hi Eric, >> >>> If event counters are implemented check the common events >>> required by the PMUv3 are implemented. >>> >>> Some are

Re: [PATCH] KVM: arm64: arch_timer shouldn't assume the vcpu is loaded

On 08/04/2020 15:19, Marc Zyngier wrote: Hi Marc, > On 2020-04-08 13:13, André Przywara wrote: >> On 08/04/2020 11:07, Marc Zyngier wrote: >> >> Hi Marc, >> >>> Hi James, >>> >>> Thanks for looking into this. >>>

Re: [PATCH v2 2/6] KVM: arm: vgic: Synchronize the whole guest on GIC{D,R}_I{S,C}ACTIVER read

On 17/04/2020 09:33, Marc Zyngier wrote: > When a guest tries to read the active state of its interrupts, > we currently just return whatever state we have in memory. This > means that if such an interrupt lives in a List Register on another > CPU, we fail to obsertve the latest active state for

Re: [PATCH 1/3] KVM: arm: vgic: Synchronize the whole guest on GIC{D,R}_I{S,C}ACTIVER read

On 14/04/2020 11:35, Marc Zyngier wrote: > When a guest tries to read the active state of its interrupts, > we currently just return whatever state we have in memory. This > means that if such an interrupt lives in a List Register on another > CPU, we fail to obsertve the latest active state for

Re: [PATCH kvmtool v3] Add emulation for CFI compatible flash memory

On 07/04/2020 16:15, Alexandru Elisei wrote: > Hi, > > I've tested this patch by running badblocks and fio on a flash device inside a > guest, everything worked as expected. > > I've also looked at the flowcharts for device operation from Intel Application > Note 646, pages 12-21, and they seem

Re: [PATCH] KVM: arm64: arch_timer shouldn't assume the vcpu is loaded

On 09/04/2020 09:08, Marc Zyngier wrote: Hi Marc, > On Wed, 8 Apr 2020 17:50:09 +0100 > André Przywara wrote: > >> On 08/04/2020 15:19, Marc Zyngier wrote: >> >> Hi Marc, >> >>> On 2020-04-08 13:13, André Przywara wrote: >>>> On 0

Re: [PATCH] KVM: arm64: arch_timer shouldn't assume the vcpu is loaded

On 08/04/2020 11:07, Marc Zyngier wrote: Hi Marc, > Hi James, > > Thanks for looking into this. > > On Mon, 6 Apr 2020 16:03:55 +0100 > James Morse wrote: > >> kvm_arch_timer_get_input_level() needs to get the arch_timer_context for >> a particular vcpu, and uses kvm_get_running_vcpu() to

Re: [PATCH][kvmtool] kvm: Request VM specific limits instead of system-wide ones

On 27/04/2020 15:17, Marc Zyngier wrote: Hi, > On arm64, the maximum number of vcpus is constrained by the type > of interrupt controller that has been selected (GICv2 imposes a > limit of 8 vcpus, while GICv3 currently has a limit of 512). > > It is thus important to request this limit on the

Re: [PATCH kvmtool v4 1/5] virtio-mmio: Assign IRQ line directly before registering device

On 24/04/2020 09:41, Will Deacon wrote: Hi Will, thanks for having a look! > On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 06:38:40PM +0100, Andre Przywara wrote: >> At the moment the IRQ line for a virtio-mmio device is assigned in the >> generic device__register() routine in devices.c, by calling back into >>

Re: [PATCH kvmtool v4 0/5] Add CFI flash emulation

On 24/04/2020 07:45, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: Hi, (adding Leif for EDK-2 discussion) > On Thu, 23 Apr 2020 at 23:32, André Przywara wrote: >> >> On 23/04/2020 21:43, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: [ ... kvmtool series to add CFI flash emulation allowing EDK-2 to store vari

Re: [PATCH kvmtool v4 0/5] Add CFI flash emulation

On 23/04/2020 21:43, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: Hi Ard, > On Thu, 23 Apr 2020 at 19:55, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: >> >> On Thu, 23 Apr 2020 at 19:39, Andre Przywara wrote: >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> an update for the CFI flash emulation, addressing Alex' comments and >>> adding direct mapping support. >>> The

Re: [PATCH kvmtool v3] Add emulation for CFI compatible flash memory

On 15/04/2020 16:43, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: Hi Ard, > On Tue, 7 Apr 2020 at 17:15, Alexandru Elisei > wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> I've tested this patch by running badblocks and fio on a flash device inside >> a >> guest, everything worked as expected. >> >> I've also looked at the flowcharts for

Re: [PATCH kvmtool v3] Add emulation for CFI compatible flash memory

On 15/04/2020 16:55, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > On Wed, 15 Apr 2020 at 17:43, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: >> >> On Tue, 7 Apr 2020 at 17:15, Alexandru Elisei >> wrote: >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> I've tested this patch by running badblocks and fio on a flash device >>> inside a >>> guest, everything worked as

Re: [PATCH kvmtool v3] Add emulation for CFI compatible flash memory

On 15/04/2020 17:20, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > On Wed, 15 Apr 2020 at 18:11, André Przywara wrote: >> >> On 15/04/2020 16:55, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: >>> On Wed, 15 Apr 2020 at 17:43, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: >>>> >>>> On Tue, 7 Apr 2020 at 17:1

Re: [PATCH kvmtool] rtc: Generate fdt node for the real-time clock

On 14/05/2020 13:20, Mark Rutland wrote: Hi, > > On Thu, May 14, 2020 at 10:45:53AM +0100, Andre Przywara wrote: >> On arm and arm64 we expose the Motorola RTC emulation to the guest, >> but never advertised this in the device tree. >> >> EDK-2 seems to rely on this device, but on its hardcoded

Re: [PATCH kvmtool] arm64: Determine kernel offset even on non-seekable file descriptors

On 20/10/2020 13:30, Andre Przywara wrote: Hi, > Commit c9acdae1d2e7 ("arm64: Use default kernel offset when the image > file can't be seeked") "guessed" the arm64 kernel offset to be the old > default of 512K if the file descriptor for the kernel image could not > be seeked. This mostly works

Re: [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v2 01/12] lib: arm/arm64: gicv3: Add missing barrier when sending IPIs

On 17/12/2020 14:13, Alexandru Elisei wrote: > One common usage for IPIs is for one CPU to write to a shared memory > location, send the IPI to kick another CPU, and the receiver to read from > the same location. Proper synchronization is needed to make sure that the > IPI receiver reads the most

Re: [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v2 05/12] arm/arm64: gic: Use correct memory ordering for the IPI test

On 17/12/2020 14:13, Alexandru Elisei wrote: > The IPI test works by sending IPIs to even numbered CPUs from the > IPI_SENDER CPU (CPU1), and then checking that the other CPUs received the > interrupts as expected. The check is done in check_acked() by the > IPI_SENDER CPU with the help of three

Re: [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v2 03/12] arm/arm64: gic: Remove SMP synchronization from ipi_clear_active_handler()

On 17/12/2020 14:13, Alexandru Elisei wrote: > The gicv{2,3}-active test sends an IPI from the boot CPU to itself, then > checks that the interrupt has been received as expected. There is no need > to use inter-processor memory synchronization primitives on code that runs > on the same CPU, so

Re: [PATCH kvmtool] arm64: Determine kernel offset even on non-seekable file descriptors

On 10/12/2020 13:20, Marc Zyngier wrote: Hi Marc, thanks for having a look! > On 2020-10-20 13:30, Andre Przywara wrote: >> Commit c9acdae1d2e7 ("arm64: Use default kernel offset when the image >> file can't be seeked") "guessed" the arm64 kernel offset to be the old >> default of 512K if the

Re: [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v2 11/12] lib: arm64: gic-v3-its: Add wmb() barrier before INT command

On 17/12/2020 14:13, Alexandru Elisei wrote: > The ITS tests use the INT command like an SGI. The its_send_int() function > kicks a CPU and then the test checks that the interrupt was observed as > expected in check_lpi_stats(). This is done by using lpi_stats.observed and > lpi_stats.expected,

Re: [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v2 10/12] arm64: gic: its-trigger: Don't trigger the LPI while it is pending

On 17/12/2020 14:13, Alexandru Elisei wrote: > The its-trigger test checks that LPI 8195 is not delivered to the CPU while > it is disabled at the ITS level. After that it is re-enabled and the test > checks that the interrupt is properly asserted. After it's re-enabled and > before the stats are

Re: [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v2 08/12] arm/arm64: gic: Split check_acked() into two functions

On 17/12/2020 14:13, Alexandru Elisei wrote: > check_acked() has several peculiarities: is the only function among the > check_* functions which calls report() directly, it does two things > (waits for interrupts and checks for misfired interrupts) and it also > mixes printf, report_info and

Re: [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v2 09/12] arm/arm64: gic: Make check_acked() more generic

On 17/12/2020 14:13, Alexandru Elisei wrote: > Testing that an interrupt is received as expected is done in three places: > in check_ipi_sender(), check_irqnr() and check_acked(). check_irqnr() > compares the interrupt ID with IPI_IRQ and records a failure in bad_irq, > and check_ipi_sender()

Re: [PATCH v3 0/5] ARM: arm64: Add SMCCC TRNG entropy service

On 13/11/2020 23:05, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > On Fri, 13 Nov 2020 at 19:24, Andre Przywara wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> an update to v2 with some fixes and a few tweaks. Ard's patch [1] should >> significantly reduce the frequency of arch_get_random_seed_long() calls, >> not sure if that is enough the

Re: [PATCH v3 4/5] arm64: Add support for SMCCC TRNG entropy source

On 19/11/2020 13:41, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: Hi, > On Fri, 13 Nov 2020 at 19:24, Andre Przywara wrote: >> >> The ARM architected TRNG firmware interface, described in ARM spec >> DEN0098, defines an ARM SMCCC based interface to a true random number >> generator, provided by firmware. >> This can

Re: [PATCH v2 4/5] arm64: Add support for SMCCC TRNG entropy source

On 05/11/2020 14:38, Mark Rutland wrote: Hi, > On Thu, Nov 05, 2020 at 02:29:49PM +, Mark Brown wrote: >> On Thu, Nov 05, 2020 at 02:03:22PM +, Mark Rutland wrote: >>> On Thu, Nov 05, 2020 at 01:41:42PM +, Mark Brown wrote: >> It isn't obvious to me why we don't fall through to

Re: [PATCH v2 5/5] KVM: arm64: implement the TRNG hypervisor call

Marc, James, Julien, Suzuki, argh, I am sorry, I forgot to CC: you guys on this patch. This is v2 of Ard's original patch, fixing the endianess problem pointed out by Drew. It's on the kvm-arm ML: https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/pipermail/kvmarm/2020-November/043138.html or here in my repo:

Re: [PATCH v2 4/5] arm64: Add support for SMCCC TRNG entropy source

On 05/11/2020 14:03, Mark Rutland wrote: > On Thu, Nov 05, 2020 at 01:41:42PM +, Mark Brown wrote: >> On Thu, Nov 05, 2020 at 12:56:55PM +, Andre Przywara wrote: >> >>> static inline bool __must_check arch_get_random_seed_int(unsigned int *v) >>> { >>> + struct arm_smccc_res res; >>>

Re: [PATCH v2 3/5] ARM: implement support for SMCCC TRNG entropy source

On 05/11/2020 17:15, kernel test robot wrote: > Hi Andre, > > I love your patch! Yet something to improve: > > [auto build test ERROR on linus/master] > [also build test ERROR on v5.10-rc2 next-20201105] > [cannot apply to arm64/for-next/core kvmarm/next arm-perf/for-next/perf] > [If your patch

Re: [PATCH v3 00/66] KVM: arm64: ARMv8.3/8.4 Nested Virtualization support

On 10/12/2020 15:58, Marc Zyngier wrote: Hi, > This is a rework of the NV series that I posted 10 months ago[1], as a > For the most courageous of you, I've put out a branch[2]. Of course, > you'll need some userspace. Andre maintains a hacked version of > kvmtool[3] that takes a --nested

Re: KVM/ARM64: Booting KVM on FVP/fastmodels

On 29/03/2021 13:13, yinhua_c...@outlook.com wrote: Hi, > I want to boot KVM on simulators. > > I don't want to use QEMU since some features are only supported on > FVP/fastmodels now. > > However, I cannot find documents/blogs/wiki about booting KVM on > FVP/fastmodels. > > Does KVM support