Re: [PATCH] kvm: rename HINTS_DEDICATED to KVM_HINTS_REALTIME

On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 01:04:31PM -0300, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > CCing qemu-devel, as I'm now discussing userspace. > > On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 10:55:33PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 03:46:58PM -0300, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > > > On Th

Re: [PATCH] kvm: rename HINTS_DEDICATED to KVM_HINTS_REALTIME

On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 11:41:23AM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > On 17/05/2018 20:46, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > > My understanding of the original patch is that the intention is > > to tell the guest that it is very unlikely to be preempted, so it > > can choose a more appropriate spinlock

Re: [PATCH] kvm: rename HINTS_DEDICATED to KVM_HINTS_REALTIME

On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 03:46:58PM -0300, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 05:54:24PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > HINTS_DEDICATED seems to be somewhat confusing: > > > > Guest doesn't really care whether it's the only task running on a host &g

[PATCH] kvm: rename HINTS_DEDICATED to KVM_HINTS_REALTIME

on a memory access, post copy migration can cause preemption, etc. Let's call it KVM_HINTS_REALTIME which seems to better match what guests expect. Also, the flag most be set on all vCPUs - current guests assume this. Note so in the documentation. Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <m...@redhat.

Re: [PATCH v2 4/6] crypto: virtio: convert to new crypto engine API

On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 08:15:32PM +0100, Corentin Labbe wrote: > This patch convert the driver to the new crypto engine API. > > Signed-off-by: Corentin Labbe <clabbe.montj...@gmail.com> Acked-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <m...@redhat.com> Pls queue when/if rest of changes go

Re: [RFC PATCH v2 0/7] x86/idle: add halt poll support

otherwise you will just get 100% CPU. kvm_halt_target_residency - halt above this target residency. Should probably be a function of the cost of halt+wakeup. kvm_halt_native - set to 0 if your VCPU does not match host. Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <m..

Re: [RFC PATCH v2 0/7] x86/idle: add halt poll support

On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 10:02:15PM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote: > Actually I'm not sure how much sense it makes to introduce this pv > stuff and the duplicate adaptive halt-polling logic as what has > already been done in kvm w/o obvious benefit for real workload like > netperf. In fact, I would

Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86/idle: add halt poll for halt idle

On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 11:22:13AM +, root wrote: > From: Yang Zhang > > This patch introduce a new mechanism to poll for a while before > entering idle state. > > David has a topic in KVM forum to describe the problem on current KVM VM > when running some message

Re: [PATCH v6] kvm: better MWAIT emulation for guests

On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 04:54:10PM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote: > > > On 12.04.17 16:34, Jim Mattson wrote: > > Actually, we have rejected commit 87c00572ba05aa8c ("kvm: x86: emulate > > monitor and mwait instructions as nop"), so when we intercept > > MONITOR/MWAIT, we synthesize #UD. Perhaps

Re: [PATCH v5 untested] kvm: better MWAIT emulation for guests

On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 10:10:05AM -0400, Gabriel L. Somlo wrote: > On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 03:35:18PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 05:02:25PM -0700, Nadav Amit wrote: > > > > > > > On Mar 21, 2017, at 3:51 PM, Gabriel

Re: [PATCH v5 untested] kvm: better MWAIT emulation for guests

On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 05:16:32PM +0100, Joerg Roedel wrote: > On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 11:22:18PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/svm.c b/arch/x86/kvm/svm.c > > index d1efe2c..18e53bc 100644 > > --- a/arch/x86/kvm/svm.c > > +++ b/arch/x

Re: [PATCH v5 untested] kvm: better MWAIT emulation for guests

On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 09:23:56AM -0400, Gabriel L. Somlo wrote: > OK, now on to Radim's test, on the MacPro1,1: > > [kvm-unit-tests]$ time TIMEOUT=20 ./x86-run x86/mwait.flat -append '240 1 1' > timeout -k 1s --foreground 20 qemu-kvm -nodefaults -enable-kvm -device > pc-testdev -device

Re: [PATCH v5 untested] kvm: better MWAIT emulation for guests

On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 05:14:15PM -0400, Gabriel L. Somlo wrote: > On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 04:17:11PM -0400, Gabriel L. Somlo wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 09:27:56PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 03:24:41PM -0400, Gabriel L. Somlo wrote: &

Re: [PATCH v5 untested] kvm: better MWAIT emulation for guests

On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 03:24:41PM -0400, Gabriel L. Somlo wrote: > On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 08:29:32PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > Let's take a step back and try to figure out how is > > mwait called. How about dumping code of VCPUs > > around mwait? gdb

Re: [PATCH v5 untested] kvm: better MWAIT emulation for guests

Let's take a step back and try to figure out how is mwait called. How about dumping code of VCPUs around mwait? gdb disa command will do this. -- MST -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info

Re: [PATCH v5 untested] kvm: better MWAIT emulation for guests

On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 12:47:50PM -0400, Gabriel L. Somlo wrote: > On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 05:01:58PM +0100, Radim Krčmář wrote: > > 2017-03-16 16:35+0100, Radim Krčmář: > > > 2017-03-16 10:58-0400, Gabriel L. Somlo: > > >> The intel manual said the same thing back in 2010 as well. However, > >

Re: [PATCH v5 untested] kvm: better MWAIT emulation for guests

On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 12:54:50PM -0400, Gabriel L. Somlo wrote: > On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 12:52:32PM -0400, Gabriel L. Somlo wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 06:45:02PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 12:16:13PM -0400, Gabriel L. Somlo wrote: &

Re: [PATCH v5 untested] kvm: better MWAIT emulation for guests

On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 12:16:13PM -0400, Gabriel L. Somlo wrote: > On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 04:35:18PM +0100, Radim Krčmář wrote: > > 2017-03-16 10:58-0400, Gabriel L. Somlo: > > > On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 04:04:12PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > > On Thu, Ma

Re: [PATCH v5 untested] kvm: better MWAIT emulation for guests

On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 09:24:27AM -0400, Gabriel L. Somlo wrote: > After studying your patch a bit more carefully (sorry, it's crazy > around here right now :) ) I realized you're simply trying to > (selectively) decide when to exit L1 and emulate as NOP vs. when to > just allow L1 to execute

Re: [PATCH v5 untested] kvm: better MWAIT emulation for guests

On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 07:35:34PM -0400, Gabriel L. Somlo wrote: > On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 11:22:18PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > Guests running Mac OS 5, 6, and 7 (Leopard through Lion) have a problem: > > unless explicitly provided with kernel command line argument

[PATCH v5 untested] kvm: better MWAIT emulation for guests

L. Somlo" <gso...@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <m...@redhat.com> --- This is for Gabriel's testing only. A bit rushed so untested. Documentation/virtual/kvm/api.txt| 9 + Documentation/virtual/kvm/cpuid.txt | 6 ++ arch/x86/include/uapi/asm

Re: [PATCH] kvm: better MWAIT emulation for guests

it :( Will resend, sorry. > > Did you accidentally leave out something that went into a .h file > somewhere ? > > Thx, > --G > > On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 09:29:57PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 03:01:12PM -0400, Gabriel L. Somlo wr

Re: [PATCH] kvm: better MWAIT emulation for guests

On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 03:01:12PM -0400, Gabriel L. Somlo wrote: > On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 08:29:23PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 02:14:26PM -0400, Gabriel L. Somlo wrote: > > > Michael, > > > > > > I tested this on OS X 10.7 (

[PATCH v4] kvm: better MWAIT emulation for guests

L. Somlo" <gso...@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <m...@redhat.com> --- Note: SVM bits are untested at this point. Seems pretty obvious though. changes from v3: - don't enable capability if cli+mwait blocks interrupts - doc typo fixes (drop drop ppc doc) changes from

Re: [PATCH] kvm: better MWAIT emulation for guests

On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 03:01:12PM -0400, Gabriel L. Somlo wrote: > On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 08:29:23PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 02:14:26PM -0400, Gabriel L. Somlo wrote: > > > Michael, > > > > > > I tested this on OS X 10.7 (

Re: [PATCH] kvm: better MWAIT emulation for guests

On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 02:14:26PM -0400, Gabriel L. Somlo wrote: > Michael, > > I tested this on OS X 10.7 (Lion), the last version that doesn't check > CPUID for MWAIT support. > > I used the latest kvm from git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/virt/kvm/kvm.git > first as-is, then with your v2 MWAIT

Re: [PATCH v3] kvm: better MWAIT emulation for guests

On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 02:58:24PM +0100, Radim Krčmář wrote: > 2017-03-14 01:44+0200, Michael S. Tsirkin: > > Guests running Mac OS 5, 6, and 7 (Leopard through Lion) have a problem: > > unless explicitly provided with kernel command line argument > > "idlehalt=0" t

[PATCH v3] kvm: better MWAIT emulation for guests

L. Somlo" <gso...@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <m...@redhat.com> --- Note: SVM bits are untested at this point. Seems pretty obvious though. changes from v2: - add a capability to allow host userspace to detect new kernels - more documentation to clarify t

Re: [PATCH] kvm: better MWAIT emulation for guests

On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 08:39:11PM +0100, Radim Krčmář wrote: > 2017-03-13 18:08+0200, Michael S. Tsirkin: > > On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 04:46:20PM +0100, Radim Krčmář wrote: > >> 2017-03-10 00:29+0200, Michael S. Tsirkin: > >> > Some guests call mwait without checkin

[PATCH v2] kvm: better MWAIT emulation for guests

he regular MWAIT flag in CPUID to signal this capability: halt is sometimes better as you are giving up the rest of your CPU slice. Add a flag in the hypervisor leaf instead. Reported-by: "Gabriel L. Somlo" <gso...@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <m...@redhat.com>

Re: [PATCH] kvm: better MWAIT emulation for guests

On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 04:46:20PM +0100, Radim Krčmář wrote: > 2017-03-10 00:29+0200, Michael S. Tsirkin: > > Some guests call mwait without checking the cpu flags. We currently > > emulate that as a NOP but on VMX we can do better: let guest stop the > > CPU unt

Re: [PATCH] kvm: better MWAIT emulation for guests

On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 03:46:45PM -0800, Jim Mattson wrote: > On Thu, Mar 9, 2017 at 2:29 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin <m...@redhat.com> wrote: > > Some guests call mwait without checking the cpu flags. We currently > > "Some guests"? What guests other than Mac OS X are

Re: [PATCH] kvm: better MWAIT emulation for guests

On Thu, Mar 09, 2017 at 07:51:27PM -0500, Gabriel L. Somlo wrote: > On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 12:29:31AM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > Some guests call mwait without checking the cpu flags. We currently > > emulate that as a NOP but on VMX we can do better: let guest stop th

[PATCH] kvm: better MWAIT emulation for guests

because you must halt if you want to go deep into sleep. Thus it isn't a good idea to use the regular MWAIT flag in CPUID for that. Add a flag in the hypervisor leaf instead. Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <m...@redhat.com> --- Documentation/virtual/kvm/cpuid.txt | 3 +++ arch/x86/includ

[PATCH v2] pci: drop link_reset

is the link reset). This will be done in a later patch. Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <m...@redhat.com> --- changes from v2: - drop from genwqe as well Note: Doug has patches dropping the implementation from infiniband card drivers in his tree already. This is unlikely to cause con

Re: [PATCH] pci: drop link_reset

On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 07:19:48PM -0500, Doug Ledford wrote: > On Wed, 2017-01-18 at 23:39 +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > No hardware seems to actually call link_reset, and > > no driver implements it as more than a nop stub. > > > > This drops the mentions of t

[PATCH] pci: drop link_reset

is the link reset). This will be done in a later patch. Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <m...@redhat.com> --- Documentation/PCI/pci-error-recovery.txt | 24 +++- drivers/infiniband/hw/hfi1/pcie.c| 10 -- drivers/infiniband/hw/qib/qib_pcie.c

[PATCH 6/8] Documentation/sparse: drop __CHECK_ENDIAN__

It's no longer used. Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <m...@redhat.com> --- Documentation/translations/zh_CN/sparse.txt | 7 +-- Documentation/dev-tools/sparse.rst | 7 +-- 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-) diff --git a/Documentation/translations

Re: [RFC PATCH v3 13/20] x86: DMA support for memory encryption

On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 04:41:37PM +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 05:22:38PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > The issue is it's a (potential) security hole, not a slowdown. > > How? Because the bounce buffers will be unencrypted and someone might &

Re: [RFC PATCH v3 13/20] x86: DMA support for memory encryption

On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 12:38:59PM +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 12:29:35PM -0600, Tom Lendacky wrote: > > > Makes sense, but I think at least a dmesg warning here > > > might be a good idea. > > > > Good idea. Should it be a warning when it is first being set up or > >

Re: [RFC PATCH v3 13/20] x86: DMA support for memory encryption

On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 12:29:35PM -0600, Tom Lendacky wrote: > On 11/15/2016 9:16 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 09, 2016 at 06:37:23PM -0600, Tom Lendacky wrote: > >> Since DMA addresses will effectively look like 48-bit addresses when the > >> me

Re: [RFC PATCH v3 13/20] x86: DMA support for memory encryption

On Wed, Nov 09, 2016 at 06:37:23PM -0600, Tom Lendacky wrote: > Since DMA addresses will effectively look like 48-bit addresses when the > memory encryption mask is set, SWIOTLB is needed if the DMA mask of the > device performing the DMA does not support 48-bits. SWIOTLB will be > initialized to

Re: [PATCH] CodingStyle: add some more error handling guidelines

On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 09:50:06PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: > On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 05:53:02PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > The point is really naming label for the part of init that failed > > (and so needs to be skipped), rather than the part that will run. > >

Re: [PATCH] CodingStyle: add some more error handling guidelines

On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 09:31:40PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: > > vhost_dev_set_owner() is an example of why come-from labels are > bad style. > > devel/drivers/vhost/vhost.c >473 /* Caller should have device mutex */ >474 long vhost_dev_set_owner(struct vhost_dev *dev) >475 { >

Re: [PATCH] CodingStyle: add some more error handling guidelines

On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 08:16:17AM -0600, Jonathan Corbet wrote: > On Mon, 22 Aug 2016 16:57:46 +0300 > "Michael S. Tsirkin" <m...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > commit commit ea04036032edda6f771c1381d03832d2ed0f6c31 ("CodingStyle: > > add some more error h

[PATCH] CodingStyle: add some more error handling guidelines

commit commit ea04036032edda6f771c1381d03832d2ed0f6c31 ("CodingStyle: add some more error handling guidelines") suggests never naming goto labels after the goto location - that is the error that is handled. But it's actually pretty common and IMHO it's a reasonable style provided each error gets

[PATCH RFC 2/3] vfio: report group noiommu status

When using vfio, callers might want to know whether device is added to a regular group or an non-iommu group. Report this status from vfio_add_group_dev. Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <m...@redhat.com> --- drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_pci.c | 2 +- drivers/vfio/pl