Re: [PATCH v5 3/4] drivers/soc/litex: support 32-bit subregisters, 64-bit CPUs

Hi Mateusz, On Tue, Jan 12, 2021 at 03:31:59PM +0100, Mateusz Holenko wrote: > > Upstream LiteX now defaults to using 32-bit CSR subregisters > > (see https://github.com/enjoy-digital/litex/commit/a2b71fde). > > > > This patch expands on commit 22447a99c97e ("drivers/soc/litex: add > > LiteX SoC

Re: [PATCH v5 0/4] drivers/soc/litex: support 32-bit subregisters, 64-bit CPUs

Ping :) On Sun, Dec 27, 2020 at 11:13:16AM -0500, Gabriel Somlo wrote: > This series expands on commit 22447a99c97e ("drivers/soc/litex: add LiteX > SoC Controller driver"), adding support for handling both 8- and 32-bit > LiteX CSR (MMIO) subregisters, on both 32- and 64-bit CPUs. > > Notes v5:

Re: [PATCH v5 4/4] drivers/soc/litex: make 'litex_[set|get]_reg()' methods private

On Sun, Dec 27, 2020 at 11:13:20AM -0500, Gabriel Somlo wrote: > The 'litex_[set|get]_reg()' methods use the 'reg_size' parameter to > specify the width of the LiteX CSR (MMIO) register being accessed. > > Since 'u64' is the widest data being supported, the value of 'reg_size' > MUST be between 1

Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] drivers/soc/litex: support 32-bit subregisters, 64-bit CPUs

On Fri, Dec 25, 2020 at 09:21:20AM -0500, Gabriel Somlo wrote: > Upstream LiteX now defaults to using 32-bit CSR subregisters > (see https://github.com/enjoy-digital/litex/commit/a2b71fde). > > This patch expands on commit 22447a99c97e ("drivers/soc/litex: add > LiteX SoC Controller driver"),

Re: [PATCH v11 3/5] drivers/soc/litex: add LiteX SoC Controller driver

Hi Geert, Mateusz, On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 03:16:02PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > Hi Mateusz, > > On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 12:10 PM Mateusz Holenko > wrote: > > From: Pawel Czarnecki > > > > This commit adds driver for the FPGA-based LiteX SoC > > Controller from LiteX SoC builder. > >

Re: [PATCH v5 3/5] drivers/soc/litex: add LiteX SoC Controller driver

Hi Ben, On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 01:21:11PM +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > On Mon, 2020-04-27 at 11:13 +0200, Mateusz Holenko wrote: > > As Gabriel Somlo suggested to me, I could still use > > readl/writel/ioread/iowrite() standard functions providing memory > > barriers *and* have values

[PATCH] staging: typec: fix endianness mismatch identified by sparse

Eliminate the following sparse warnings: tcpci.c:291:38: warning: incorrect type in argument 1 (different base types) tcpci.c:291:38:expected unsigned short [unsigned] [usertype] header tcpci.c:291:38:got restricted __le16 const [usertype] header tcpci.c:296:16: warning: incorrect type in

[PATCH] staging: typec: fix endianness mismatch identified by sparse

Eliminate the following sparse warnings: tcpci.c:291:38: warning: incorrect type in argument 1 (different base types) tcpci.c:291:38:expected unsigned short [unsigned] [usertype] header tcpci.c:291:38:got restricted __le16 const [usertype] header tcpci.c:296:16: warning: incorrect type in

Re: [PATCH] firmware: Use PTR_ERR_OR_ZERO()

Acked-by: Gabriel Somlo On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 10:40:27PM +0100, Vasyl Gomonovych wrote: > Fix ptr_ret.cocci warnings: > drivers/firmware/efi/efi.c:610:8-14: WARNING: PTR_ERR_OR_ZERO can be used > > Use PTR_ERR_OR_ZERO rather than if(IS_ERR(...)) + PTR_ERR > > Generated by:

Re: [PATCH] firmware: Use PTR_ERR_OR_ZERO()

Acked-by: Gabriel Somlo On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 10:40:27PM +0100, Vasyl Gomonovych wrote: > Fix ptr_ret.cocci warnings: > drivers/firmware/efi/efi.c:610:8-14: WARNING: PTR_ERR_OR_ZERO can be used > > Use PTR_ERR_OR_ZERO rather than if(IS_ERR(...)) + PTR_ERR > > Generated by:

Re: [PATCH v4 3/5] fw_cfg: do DMA read operation

> b/drivers/firmware/qemu_fw_cfg.c > > > index 1f3e8545dab7..8ce5e49b7c62 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/firmware/qemu_fw_cfg.c > > > +++ b/drivers/firmware/qemu_fw_cfg.c > > > @@ -33,6 +33,8 @@ > > > #include > > > #include > > > #include

Re: [PATCH v4 3/5] fw_cfg: do DMA read operation

gt; > > index 1f3e8545dab7..8ce5e49b7c62 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/firmware/qemu_fw_cfg.c > > > +++ b/drivers/firmware/qemu_fw_cfg.c > > > @@ -33,6 +33,8 @@ > > > #include > > > #include > > > #include > > > +#incl

Re: [PATCH v4 5/5] fw_cfg: write vmcoreinfo details

fg.c > index 8ce5e49b7c62..ebd9bb134900 100644 > --- a/drivers/firmware/qemu_fw_cfg.c > +++ b/drivers/firmware/qemu_fw_cfg.c > @@ -35,6 +35,8 @@ > #include > #include > #include > +#include > +#include > > MODULE_AUTHOR("Gabriel L. Somlo <

Re: [PATCH v4 1/5] fw_cfg: fix the command line module name

On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 04:19:34PM +0100, Marc-André Lureau wrote: > Signed-off-by: Marc-André Lureau Acked-by: Gabriel Somlo > --- > drivers/firmware/qemu_fw_cfg.c | 8 > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > diff --git

Re: [PATCH v4 5/5] fw_cfg: write vmcoreinfo details

bd9bb134900 100644 > --- a/drivers/firmware/qemu_fw_cfg.c > +++ b/drivers/firmware/qemu_fw_cfg.c > @@ -35,6 +35,8 @@ > #include > #include > #include > +#include > +#include > > MODULE_AUTHOR("Gabriel L. Somlo "); > MODULE_DESCRIPTION("QEMU

Re: [PATCH v4 1/5] fw_cfg: fix the command line module name

On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 04:19:34PM +0100, Marc-André Lureau wrote: > Signed-off-by: Marc-André Lureau Acked-by: Gabriel Somlo > --- > drivers/firmware/qemu_fw_cfg.c | 8 > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/firmware/qemu_fw_cfg.c

Re: [PATCH v4 0/5] fw_cfg: add DMA operations & etc/vmcoreinfo support

On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 04:19:33PM +0100, Marc-André Lureau wrote: > Hi, > > This series adds DMA operations support to the qemu fw_cfg kernel > module and populates "etc/vmcoreinfo" with vmcoreinfo location > details. > > Note: the support for this entry handling has been merged for next > qemu

Re: [PATCH v4 0/5] fw_cfg: add DMA operations & etc/vmcoreinfo support

On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 04:19:33PM +0100, Marc-André Lureau wrote: > Hi, > > This series adds DMA operations support to the qemu fw_cfg kernel > module and populates "etc/vmcoreinfo" with vmcoreinfo location > details. > > Note: the support for this entry handling has been merged for next > qemu

Re: [PATCH v4 4/5] crash: export paddr_vmcoreinfo_note()

On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 04:19:37PM +0100, Marc-André Lureau wrote: > The following patch is going to use the symbol from the fw_cfg module. > > Signed-off-by: Marc-André Lureau Acked-by: Gabriel Somlo > --- > kernel/crash_core.c | 1 + > 1 file

Re: [PATCH v4 4/5] crash: export paddr_vmcoreinfo_note()

On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 04:19:37PM +0100, Marc-André Lureau wrote: > The following patch is going to use the symbol from the fw_cfg module. > > Signed-off-by: Marc-André Lureau Acked-by: Gabriel Somlo > --- > kernel/crash_core.c | 1 + > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > > diff --git

Re: [PATCH v4 3/5] fw_cfg: do DMA read operation

ce5e49b7c62 100644 > --- a/drivers/firmware/qemu_fw_cfg.c > +++ b/drivers/firmware/qemu_fw_cfg.c > @@ -33,6 +33,8 @@ > #include > #include > #include > +#include > +#include > > MODULE_AUTHOR("Gabriel L. Somlo <so...@cmu.edu>"); > MODULE_D

Re: [PATCH v4 3/5] fw_cfg: do DMA read operation

rivers/firmware/qemu_fw_cfg.c > +++ b/drivers/firmware/qemu_fw_cfg.c > @@ -33,6 +33,8 @@ > #include > #include > #include > +#include > +#include > > MODULE_AUTHOR("Gabriel L. Somlo "); > MODULE_DESCRIPTION("QEMU fw_cfg sysfs support"); > @@

Re: [PATCH v4 2/5] fw_cfg: add DMA register

On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 04:19:35PM +0100, Marc-André Lureau wrote: > Add an optional kernel module (or command line) parameter > using the following syntax: > > [qemu_fw_cfg.]ioport=@[::[:]] > or > [qemu_fw_cfg.]mmio=@[::[:]] > > and initializes the register address using given or

Re: [PATCH v4 2/5] fw_cfg: add DMA register

On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 04:19:35PM +0100, Marc-André Lureau wrote: > Add an optional kernel module (or command line) parameter > using the following syntax: > > [qemu_fw_cfg.]ioport=@[::[:]] > or > [qemu_fw_cfg.]mmio=@[::[:]] > > and initializes the register address using given or

[PATCH v2] staging: fsl-mc: fix typo in comment

Resolving checkpatch issue: CHECK: 'successfuly' may be misspelled - perhaps 'successfully'? Signed-off-by: Gabriel Somlo <gso...@gmail.com> --- On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 02:57:40PM +0200, Greg KH wrote: > On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 03:43:35PM -0400, Gabriel L. Somlo wrote: > > Signed-

[PATCH v2] staging: fsl-mc: fix typo in comment

Resolving checkpatch issue: CHECK: 'successfuly' may be misspelled - perhaps 'successfully'? Signed-off-by: Gabriel Somlo --- On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 02:57:40PM +0200, Greg KH wrote: > On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 03:43:35PM -0400, Gabriel L. Somlo wrote: > > Signed-off-by: Gabr

[PATCH] staging: fsl-mc: fix misspelled comment identified by checkpatch

Signed-off-by: Gabriel Somlo --- drivers/staging/fsl-mc/bus/dpio/dpio-service.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/drivers/staging/fsl-mc/bus/dpio/dpio-service.c b/drivers/staging/fsl-mc/bus/dpio/dpio-service.c index e5d6674..8c45f81 100644 ---

[PATCH] staging: fsl-mc: fix misspelled comment identified by checkpatch

Signed-off-by: Gabriel Somlo --- drivers/staging/fsl-mc/bus/dpio/dpio-service.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/drivers/staging/fsl-mc/bus/dpio/dpio-service.c b/drivers/staging/fsl-mc/bus/dpio/dpio-service.c index e5d6674..8c45f81 100644 ---

Re: [PATCH 0/4] KVM: x86: kvm_mwait_in_guest() cleanup and fixes

On Thu, May 04, 2017 at 08:07:15PM +0200, Radim Krčmář wrote: > 2017-05-04 13:56-0400, Gabriel L. Somlo: > > If I wanted to test this (e.g. with OS X 10.8 guests on several of my older > > Mac boxes running Fedora), which git repo would you have me use? (The series > > won't

Re: [PATCH 0/4] KVM: x86: kvm_mwait_in_guest() cleanup and fixes

On Thu, May 04, 2017 at 08:07:15PM +0200, Radim Krčmář wrote: > 2017-05-04 13:56-0400, Gabriel L. Somlo: > > If I wanted to test this (e.g. with OS X 10.8 guests on several of my older > > Mac boxes running Fedora), which git repo would you have me use? (The series > > won't

Re: [PATCH 0/4] KVM: x86: kvm_mwait_in_guest() cleanup and fixes

On Thu, May 04, 2017 at 08:07:15PM +0200, Radim Krčmář wrote: > 2017-05-04 13:56-0400, Gabriel L. Somlo: > > If I wanted to test this (e.g. with OS X 10.8 guests on several of my older > > Mac boxes running Fedora), which git repo would you have me use? (The series > > won't

Re: [PATCH 0/4] KVM: x86: kvm_mwait_in_guest() cleanup and fixes

On Thu, May 04, 2017 at 08:07:15PM +0200, Radim Krčmář wrote: > 2017-05-04 13:56-0400, Gabriel L. Somlo: > > If I wanted to test this (e.g. with OS X 10.8 guests on several of my older > > Mac boxes running Fedora), which git repo would you have me use? (The series > > won't

Re: [PATCH 0/4] KVM: x86: kvm_mwait_in_guest() cleanup and fixes

Hi Radim, On Wed, May 03, 2017 at 09:37:29PM +0200, Radim Krčmář wrote: > kvm_mwait_in_guest() was overcomplicated and also missed one AMD bug > that should prevent MWAIT pass through. > > This series ignores errata that don't have any Linux bug defined; > I know of two minor (not affecting the

Re: [PATCH 0/4] KVM: x86: kvm_mwait_in_guest() cleanup and fixes

Hi Radim, On Wed, May 03, 2017 at 09:37:29PM +0200, Radim Krčmář wrote: > kvm_mwait_in_guest() was overcomplicated and also missed one AMD bug > that should prevent MWAIT pass through. > > This series ignores errata that don't have any Linux bug defined; > I know of two minor (not affecting the

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

On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 08:41:11AM -0400, Gabriel L. Somlo wrote: > On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 01:45:35PM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote: > > From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <m...@redhat.com> > > > > Guests that are heavy on futexes end up IPI'ing each other a lot. That

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

On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 08:41:11AM -0400, Gabriel L. Somlo wrote: > On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 01:45:35PM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote: > > From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" > > > > Guests that are heavy on futexes end up IPI'ing each other a lot. That > > can lead

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

uot; ? > We consciously do *not* expose the feature in our CPUID bitmap, as most > people will want to benefit from sleeping vCPUs to allow for over commit. > > Reported-by: "Gabriel L. Somlo" <gso...@gmail.com> That's maybe a bit inacurate, I didn't actually report a

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

iously do *not* expose the feature in our CPUID bitmap, as most > people will want to benefit from sleeping vCPUs to allow for over commit. > > Reported-by: "Gabriel L. Somlo" That's maybe a bit inacurate, I didn't actually report anything *this* patch is trying to address (th

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

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 Somlo wrote: > > > > > > And I get the exact same results on the MacBookAir4,2 (which exhibits > > >

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

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 Somlo wrote: > > > > > > And I get the exact same results on the MacBookAir4,2 (which exhibits > > > no freezing or

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

On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 04:03:59AM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > 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 wro

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

On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 04:03:59AM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > 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 wro

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

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: > > > On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 08:29:32PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:

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

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: > > > On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 08:29:32PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:

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

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: > > 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 > > &

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

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: > > 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 > > &

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

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 disa command will do this. Started guest with '-s', tried to attach from gdb with "target remote

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

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 disa command will do this. Started guest with '-s', tried to attach from gdb with "target remote

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

On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 07:27:34PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > 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: > > > > 2017-03-1

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

On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 07:27:34PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > 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: > > > > 2017-03-1

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

On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 06:22:44PM +0100, Radim Krčmář wrote: > 2017-03-16 12:47-0400, Gabriel L. Somlo: > > 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:

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

On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 06:22:44PM +0100, Radim Krčmář wrote: > 2017-03-16 12:47-0400, Gabriel L. Somlo: > > 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:

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

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: > > > On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 04:35:18PM +0100, Radim Krčmář wrote: > &

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

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: > > > On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 04:35:18PM +0100, Radim Krčmář wrote: > &

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

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

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

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

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

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, > >> regardless of how any flags were se

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

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, > >> regardless of how any flags were se

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

On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 04:54:06PM +0100, Radim Krčmář wrote: > 2017-03-16 11:44-0400, Gabriel L. Somlo: > > On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 03:08:07PM +0100, Radim Krčmář wrote: > >> 2017-03-16 09:24-0400, Gabriel L. Somlo: > >> > On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 01:41:28AM +

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

On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 04:54:06PM +0100, Radim Krčmář wrote: > 2017-03-16 11:44-0400, Gabriel L. Somlo: > > On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 03:08:07PM +0100, Radim Krčmář wrote: > >> 2017-03-16 09:24-0400, Gabriel L. Somlo: > >> > On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 01:41:28AM +

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

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, Mar 16, 2017 at 09:24:27AM -0400, Gabriel L. Somlo wrote: > > > > After

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

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, Mar 16, 2017 at 09:24:27AM -0400, Gabriel L. Somlo wrote: > > > > After

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

On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 03:08:07PM +0100, Radim Krčmář wrote: > 2017-03-16 09:24-0400, Gabriel L. Somlo: > > On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 01:41:28AM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 07:35:34PM -0400, Gabriel L. Somlo wrote: > > > > On Wed, Ma

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

On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 03:08:07PM +0100, Radim Krčmář wrote: > 2017-03-16 09:24-0400, Gabriel L. Somlo: > > On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 01:41:28AM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 07:35:34PM -0400, Gabriel L. Somlo wrote: > > > > On Wed, Ma

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

On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 04:04:12PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > 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 > >

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

On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 04:04:12PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > 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 > >

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

On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 01:41:28AM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > 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 Li

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

On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 01:41:28AM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > 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 Li

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

running guest-mode MWAIT in a tight loop will actually waste the host CPU without the opportunity to yield to some other L0 thread. Sorry if I fell into the middle of an ongoing conversation on this and missed most of the relevant context, in which case please feel free to ignore me... :) Thanks

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

running guest-mode MWAIT in a tight loop will actually waste the host CPU without the opportunity to yield to some other L0 thread. Sorry if I fell into the middle of an ongoing conversation on this and missed most of the relevant context, in which case please feel free to ignore me... :) Th

Re: [PATCH v4] kvm: better MWAIT emulation for guests

On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 09:46:18PM +0100, Radim Krčmář wrote: > 2017-03-15 16:21-0400, Gabriel L. Somlo: > > On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 09:13:49PM +0100, Radim Krčmář wrote: > >> 2017-03-15 21:28+0200, Michael S. Tsirkin: > >> > Guests running Mac OS 5, 6, and 7 (Leopar

Re: [PATCH v4] kvm: better MWAIT emulation for guests

On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 09:46:18PM +0100, Radim Krčmář wrote: > 2017-03-15 16:21-0400, Gabriel L. Somlo: > > On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 09:13:49PM +0100, Radim Krčmář wrote: > >> 2017-03-15 21:28+0200, Michael S. Tsirkin: > >> > Guests running Mac OS 5, 6, and 7 (Leopar

Re: [PATCH v4] kvm: better MWAIT emulation for guests

a flag in the hypervisor leaf instead. > > > > Additionally, we add a capability for QEMU - e.g. if it knows there's an > > isolated CPU dedicated for the VCPU it can set the standard MWAIT flag > > to improve guest behaviour. > > > > Reported-by: "Gabri

Re: [PATCH v4] kvm: better MWAIT emulation for guests

a flag in the hypervisor leaf instead. > > > > Additionally, we add a capability for QEMU - e.g. if it knows there's an > > isolated CPU dedicated for the VCPU it can set the standard MWAIT flag > > to improve guest behaviour. > > > > Reported-by: &quo

Re: [PATCH v4] kvm: better MWAIT emulation for guests

On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 04:21:41PM -0400, Gabriel L. Somlo wrote: > > > > - do you see VM exits on the "hung" VCPU? > > how would I go about looking ? > > > - what is your CPU model? > > $ cat /proc/cpuinfo > ... > processor : 3 >

Re: [PATCH v4] kvm: better MWAIT emulation for guests

On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 04:21:41PM -0400, Gabriel L. Somlo wrote: > > > > - do you see VM exits on the "hung" VCPU? > > how would I go about looking ? > > > - what is your CPU model? > > $ cat /proc/cpuinfo > ... > processor : 3 >

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

le:1002: recipe for target 'arch/x86' failed make: *** [arch/x86] Error 2 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 wrote:

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

le:1002: recipe for target 'arch/x86' failed make: *** [arch/x86] Error 2 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 wrote:

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

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 (Lion), the last version that doesn't check > > CPUID for MWAIT support. > > &

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

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 (Lion), the last version that doesn't check > > CPUID for MWAIT support. > > &

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

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 patch applied. Single-(V)CPU guest works as expected (but then again,

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

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 patch applied. Single-(V)CPU guest works as expected (but then again,

kvm-kmod (Re: [PATCH v2] kvm: better MWAIT emulation for guests)

this reason it > might not be a good idea to use the 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.

kvm-kmod (Re: [PATCH v2] kvm: better MWAIT emulation for guests)

this reason it > might not be a good idea to use the 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" >

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

On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 02:01:32AM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > 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 wrote: > > > Some guests call mwait without checking the cpu flags. We currently > > > >

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

On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 02:01:32AM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > 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 wrote: > > > Some guests call mwait without checking the cpu flags. We currently > > > > "Some guests"? What

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

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 the > CPU until timer or IPI. CPU will be busy but that isn't any worse than > a NOP

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

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 the > CPU until timer or IPI. CPU will be busy but that isn't any worse than > a NOP

Re: [PATCH 0/6] firmware-qemu_fw_cfg: Fine-tuning for four function implementations

On Sun, Sep 18, 2016 at 02:48:30PM +0200, SF Markus Elfring wrote: > From: Markus Elfring > Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2016 14:43:21 +0200 > > Some update suggestions were taken into account > from static source code analysis. > > Markus Elfring (6): > Use

Re: [PATCH 0/6] firmware-qemu_fw_cfg: Fine-tuning for four function implementations

On Sun, Sep 18, 2016 at 02:48:30PM +0200, SF Markus Elfring wrote: > From: Markus Elfring > Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2016 14:43:21 +0200 > > Some update suggestions were taken into account > from static source code analysis. > > Markus Elfring (6): > Use kmalloc_array() in

Re: [PATCH] KVM: Handle MSR_IA32_PERF_CTL

On Thu, May 26, 2016 at 10:39:31PM +0200, Radim Krčmář wrote: > 2016-05-26 10:32+0300, km...@yandex-team.ru: > > From: Dmitry Bilunov > > > > Intel CPUs having Turbo Boost feature implement an MSR to provide a > > control interface via rdmsr/wrmsr instructions. One could

Re: [PATCH] KVM: Handle MSR_IA32_PERF_CTL

On Thu, May 26, 2016 at 10:39:31PM +0200, Radim Krčmář wrote: > 2016-05-26 10:32+0300, km...@yandex-team.ru: > > From: Dmitry Bilunov > > > > Intel CPUs having Turbo Boost feature implement an MSR to provide a > > control interface via rdmsr/wrmsr instructions. One could detect the > > presence

Re: [patch] firmware: qemu_fw_cfg.c: potential unintialized variable

On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 12:33:37PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: > It acpi_acquire_global_lock() return AE_NOT_CONFIGURED then "glk" isn't > initialized, which, if you got very unlucky, could cause a bug. > > Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter > > diff --git

Re: [patch] firmware: qemu_fw_cfg.c: potential unintialized variable

On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 12:33:37PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: > It acpi_acquire_global_lock() return AE_NOT_CONFIGURED then "glk" isn't > initialized, which, if you got very unlucky, could cause a bug. > > Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter > > diff --git a/drivers/firmware/qemu_fw_cfg.c

Re: [patch] firmware: qemu_fw_cfg.c: potential unintialized variable

On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 10:12:53PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: > On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 02:40:06PM -0400, Gabriel L. Somlo wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 12:33:37PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: > > > It acpi_acquire_global_lock() return AE_NOT_CONFIGURE

Re: [patch] firmware: qemu_fw_cfg.c: potential unintialized variable

On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 10:12:53PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: > On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 02:40:06PM -0400, Gabriel L. Somlo wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 12:33:37PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: > > > It acpi_acquire_global_lock() return AE_NOT_CONFIGURE

Re: [patch] firmware: qemu_fw_cfg.c: potential unintialized variable

On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 12:33:37PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: > It acpi_acquire_global_lock() return AE_NOT_CONFIGURED then "glk" isn't ^ ^ Ifreturns > initialized, which, if you got very unlucky, could cause a bug. In principle I'm

Re: [patch] firmware: qemu_fw_cfg.c: potential unintialized variable

On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 12:33:37PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: > It acpi_acquire_global_lock() return AE_NOT_CONFIGURED then "glk" isn't ^ ^ Ifreturns > initialized, which, if you got very unlucky, could cause a bug. In principle I'm

Re: [PATCH v2] firmware: qemu_fw_cfg.c: hold ACPI global lock during device access

On Tue, Apr 05, 2016 at 11:54:19AM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 09:33:40AM -0400, Gabriel L. Somlo wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 06:57:01PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > On Tue, Mar 08, 2016 at 01:30:50PM -0500, Gabriel Somlo wrote

Re: [PATCH v2] firmware: qemu_fw_cfg.c: hold ACPI global lock during device access

On Tue, Apr 05, 2016 at 11:54:19AM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 09:33:40AM -0400, Gabriel L. Somlo wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 06:57:01PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > On Tue, Mar 08, 2016 at 01:30:50PM -0500, Gabriel Somlo wrote

  1   2   3   >