Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

On 31/08/17 16:01, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: > On 08/31/2017 08:00 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote: >> On Thu, 31 Aug 2017, Juergen Gross wrote: I've applied it on top of tip:x86/apic and fixed up the merge conflicts mindlessly. Patch below. Juergen, can you please check the result? >>>

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

On 31/08/17 16:01, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: > On 08/31/2017 08:00 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote: >> On Thu, 31 Aug 2017, Juergen Gross wrote: I've applied it on top of tip:x86/apic and fixed up the merge conflicts mindlessly. Patch below. Juergen, can you please check the result? >>>

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

On Thu, 31 Aug 2017, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: > On 08/31/2017 08:00 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > On Thu, 31 Aug 2017, Juergen Gross wrote: > >>> I've applied it on top of tip:x86/apic and fixed up the merge conflicts > >>> mindlessly. Patch below. > >>> > >>> Juergen, can you please check the

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

On Thu, 31 Aug 2017, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: > On 08/31/2017 08:00 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > On Thu, 31 Aug 2017, Juergen Gross wrote: > >>> I've applied it on top of tip:x86/apic and fixed up the merge conflicts > >>> mindlessly. Patch below. > >>> > >>> Juergen, can you please check the

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

On 08/31/2017 08:00 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Thu, 31 Aug 2017, Juergen Gross wrote: >>> I've applied it on top of tip:x86/apic and fixed up the merge conflicts >>> mindlessly. Patch below. >>> >>> Juergen, can you please check the result? >> You missed the updates to

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

On 08/31/2017 08:00 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Thu, 31 Aug 2017, Juergen Gross wrote: >>> I've applied it on top of tip:x86/apic and fixed up the merge conflicts >>> mindlessly. Patch below. >>> >>> Juergen, can you please check the result? >> You missed the updates to

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

On Thu, 2017-08-31 at 11:16 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > * Thomas Gleixner wrote: > Low prio nitpicking, could we please write such table based initializers in a > vertically organized, tabular fashion: > > > + { debug,xen_xendebug,

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

On Thu, 2017-08-31 at 11:16 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > * Thomas Gleixner wrote: > Low prio nitpicking, could we please write such table based initializers in a > vertically organized, tabular fashion: > > > + { debug,xen_xendebug, > > true

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

On Thu, 31 Aug 2017, Juergen Gross wrote: > > I've applied it on top of tip:x86/apic and fixed up the merge conflicts > > mindlessly. Patch below. > > > > Juergen, can you please check the result? > > You missed the updates to arch/x86/xen/xen-asm_64.S and the declarations > of the xen specific

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

On Thu, 31 Aug 2017, Juergen Gross wrote: > > I've applied it on top of tip:x86/apic and fixed up the merge conflicts > > mindlessly. Patch below. > > > > Juergen, can you please check the result? > > You missed the updates to arch/x86/xen/xen-asm_64.S and the declarations > of the xen specific

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

On 31/08/17 11:00, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Thu, 31 Aug 2017, Thomas Gleixner wrote: >> Hrm. For some reason I missed to remove these defines after getting rid of >> the tracing idt. >> >> I'll remove that now in tip and pull in the XEN stuff to see what needs to >> be done. > > I pushed out

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

On 31/08/17 11:00, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Thu, 31 Aug 2017, Thomas Gleixner wrote: >> Hrm. For some reason I missed to remove these defines after getting rid of >> the tracing idt. >> >> I'll remove that now in tip and pull in the XEN stuff to see what needs to >> be done. > > I pushed out

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

* Thomas Gleixner wrote: > --- a/arch/x86/xen/enlighten_pv.c > +++ b/arch/x86/xen/enlighten_pv.c > @@ -586,6 +586,68 @@ static void xen_write_ldt_entry(struct d > preempt_enable(); > } > > +#ifdef CONFIG_X86_64 > +static struct { > + void (*orig)(void); > +

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

* Thomas Gleixner wrote: > --- a/arch/x86/xen/enlighten_pv.c > +++ b/arch/x86/xen/enlighten_pv.c > @@ -586,6 +586,68 @@ static void xen_write_ldt_entry(struct d > preempt_enable(); > } > > +#ifdef CONFIG_X86_64 > +static struct { > + void (*orig)(void); > + void (*xen)(void); >

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

On Thu, 31 Aug 2017, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > Hrm. For some reason I missed to remove these defines after getting rid of > the tracing idt. > > I'll remove that now in tip and pull in the XEN stuff to see what needs to > be done. I pushed out the removal of the trace leftovers. Talked to Juergen

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

On Thu, 31 Aug 2017, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > Hrm. For some reason I missed to remove these defines after getting rid of > the tracing idt. > > I'll remove that now in tip and pull in the XEN stuff to see what needs to > be done. I pushed out the removal of the trace leftovers. Talked to Juergen

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

On Thu, 31 Aug 2017, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This > is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial > conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree > is submitted for merging. You may

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

On Thu, 31 Aug 2017, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This > is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial > conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree > is submitted for merging. You may

linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

Hi all, Today's linux-next merge of the xen-tip tree got a conflict in: arch/x86/xen/enlighten_pv.c between commit: 64b163fab684 ("x86/idt: Unify gate_struct handling for 32/64-bit kernels") from the tip tree and commit: ad5b8c4ba323 ("xen: get rid of paravirt op

linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

Hi all, Today's linux-next merge of the xen-tip tree got a conflict in: arch/x86/xen/enlighten_pv.c between commit: 64b163fab684 ("x86/idt: Unify gate_struct handling for 32/64-bit kernels") from the tip tree and commit: ad5b8c4ba323 ("xen: get rid of paravirt op

linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

Hi all, Today's linux-next merge of the xen-tip tree got a conflict in: arch/x86/include/asm/traps.h between commit: 11a7ffb01703 ("x86/traps: Simplify pagefault tracing logic") from the tip tree and commit: ad5b8c4ba323 ("xen: get rid of paravirt op adjust_exception_frame") from the

linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

Hi all, Today's linux-next merge of the xen-tip tree got a conflict in: arch/x86/include/asm/traps.h between commit: 11a7ffb01703 ("x86/traps: Simplify pagefault tracing logic") from the tip tree and commit: ad5b8c4ba323 ("xen: get rid of paravirt op adjust_exception_frame") from the

linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

Hi all, Today's linux-next merge of the xen-tip tree got conflicts in: arch/x86/xen/xen-asm.S arch/x86/xen/xen-asm_64.S between commit: edcb5cf84f05 ("x86/paravirt/xen: Remove xen_patch()") from the tip tree and commits: ad5b8c4ba323("xen: get rid of paravirt op

linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

Hi all, Today's linux-next merge of the xen-tip tree got conflicts in: arch/x86/xen/xen-asm.S arch/x86/xen/xen-asm_64.S between commit: edcb5cf84f05 ("x86/paravirt/xen: Remove xen_patch()") from the tip tree and commits: ad5b8c4ba323("xen: get rid of paravirt op

linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

Hi all, Today's linux-next merge of the xen-tip tree got a conflict in: arch/x86/entry/entry_64.S between commit: UNWIND_HINT_IRET_REGS ("x86/entry/64: Add unwind hint annotations") from the tip tree and commit: ad5b8c4ba323 ("xen: get rid of paravirt op adjust_exception_frame") from

linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

Hi all, Today's linux-next merge of the xen-tip tree got a conflict in: arch/x86/entry/entry_64.S between commit: UNWIND_HINT_IRET_REGS ("x86/entry/64: Add unwind hint annotations") from the tip tree and commit: ad5b8c4ba323 ("xen: get rid of paravirt op adjust_exception_frame") from

linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

Hi all, Today's linux-next merge of the xen-tip tree got a conflict in: drivers/xen/events/events_base.c between commit: ef1c2cc88531 ("xen/events: Add support for effective affinity mask") from the tip tree and commit: c48f64ab4723 ("xen-evtchn: Bind dyn evtchn:qemu-dm interrupt to

linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

Hi all, Today's linux-next merge of the xen-tip tree got a conflict in: drivers/xen/events/events_base.c between commit: ef1c2cc88531 ("xen/events: Add support for effective affinity mask") from the tip tree and commit: c48f64ab4723 ("xen-evtchn: Bind dyn evtchn:qemu-dm interrupt to

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

Hi all, On Wed, 12 Apr 2017 14:30:21 +1000 Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > Today's linux-next merge of the xen-tip tree got a conflict in: > > arch/x86/xen/enlighten.c > > between commit: > > 687d77a5f7b2 ("x86/xen: Update e820 table handling to the new core x86 E820

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

Hi all, On Wed, 12 Apr 2017 14:30:21 +1000 Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > Today's linux-next merge of the xen-tip tree got a conflict in: > > arch/x86/xen/enlighten.c > > between commit: > > 687d77a5f7b2 ("x86/xen: Update e820 table handling to the new core x86 E820 > code") > > from the

linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

Hi all, Today's linux-next merge of the xen-tip tree got a conflict in: arch/x86/xen/enlighten.c between commit: 687d77a5f7b2 ("x86/xen: Update e820 table handling to the new core x86 E820 code") from the tip tree and commit: ca7b75377014 ("x86/xen: split off enlighten_pvh.c") from

linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

Hi all, Today's linux-next merge of the xen-tip tree got a conflict in: arch/x86/xen/enlighten.c between commit: 687d77a5f7b2 ("x86/xen: Update e820 table handling to the new core x86 E820 code") from the tip tree and commit: ca7b75377014 ("x86/xen: split off enlighten_pvh.c") from

linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

Hi all, Today's linux-next merge of the xen-tip tree got a conflict in: arch/x86/xen/mmu.c between commit: 66441bd3cfdc ("x86/boot/e820: Move asm/e820.h to asm/e820/api.h") from the tip tree and commit: 5159dc315db8 ("x86/xen: split off mmu_pv.c") from the xen-tip tree. The code

linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

Hi all, Today's linux-next merge of the xen-tip tree got a conflict in: arch/x86/xen/mmu.c between commit: 66441bd3cfdc ("x86/boot/e820: Move asm/e820.h to asm/e820/api.h") from the tip tree and commit: 5159dc315db8 ("x86/xen: split off mmu_pv.c") from the xen-tip tree. The code

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

On 03/04/17 16:38, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Juergen Gross wrote: > >>> So my suggestion would be: could you delay 75cd32d6093e for a week, and >>> then >>> merge it on top of a pulled in tip:x86/mm? I'll send that tree to Linus on >>> the >>> first day of the merge window

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

On 03/04/17 16:38, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Juergen Gross wrote: > >>> So my suggestion would be: could you delay 75cd32d6093e for a week, and >>> then >>> merge it on top of a pulled in tip:x86/mm? I'll send that tree to Linus on >>> the >>> first day of the merge window so there shouldn't

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

* Juergen Gross wrote: > > So my suggestion would be: could you delay 75cd32d6093e for a week, and > > then > > merge it on top of a pulled in tip:x86/mm? I'll send that tree to Linus on > > the > > first day of the merge window so there shouldn't be any ordering problems.

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

* Juergen Gross wrote: > > So my suggestion would be: could you delay 75cd32d6093e for a week, and > > then > > merge it on top of a pulled in tip:x86/mm? I'll send that tree to Linus on > > the > > first day of the merge window so there shouldn't be any ordering problems. > > Okay, that's

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

Hi Juergen, On Wed, 29 Mar 2017 11:54:57 +0200 Juergen Gross wrote: > > Stephen, I have rewound the linux-next branch of xen-tip to its previous > position. You can re-enable xen-tip. Thanks, it should be all good tomorrow. -- Cheers, Stephen Rothwell

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

Hi Juergen, On Wed, 29 Mar 2017 11:54:57 +0200 Juergen Gross wrote: > > Stephen, I have rewound the linux-next branch of xen-tip to its previous > position. You can re-enable xen-tip. Thanks, it should be all good tomorrow. -- Cheers, Stephen Rothwell

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

* Juergen Gross wrote: > On 29/03/17 10:59, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > * Juergen Gross wrote: > > > >> On 29/03/17 05:35, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > >>> Hi all, > >>> > >>> Today's linux-next merge of the xen-tip tree got a conflict in: > >>> > >>>

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

* Juergen Gross wrote: > On 29/03/17 10:59, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > * Juergen Gross wrote: > > > >> On 29/03/17 05:35, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > >>> Hi all, > >>> > >>> Today's linux-next merge of the xen-tip tree got a conflict in: > >>> > >>> arch/x86/xen/enlighten.c > >>> > >>>

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

Juergen Gross writes: > On 29/03/17 10:59, Ingo Molnar wrote: >> >> * Juergen Gross wrote: >> >>> On 29/03/17 05:35, Stephen Rothwell wrote: Hi all, Today's linux-next merge of the xen-tip tree got a conflict in:

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

Juergen Gross writes: > On 29/03/17 10:59, Ingo Molnar wrote: >> >> * Juergen Gross wrote: >> >>> On 29/03/17 05:35, Stephen Rothwell wrote: Hi all, Today's linux-next merge of the xen-tip tree got a conflict in: arch/x86/xen/enlighten.c between commits:

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

On 29/03/17 10:59, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Juergen Gross wrote: > >> On 29/03/17 05:35, Stephen Rothwell wrote: >>> Hi all, >>> >>> Today's linux-next merge of the xen-tip tree got a conflict in: >>> >>> arch/x86/xen/enlighten.c >>> >>> between commits: >>> >>>

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

On 29/03/17 10:59, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Juergen Gross wrote: > >> On 29/03/17 05:35, Stephen Rothwell wrote: >>> Hi all, >>> >>> Today's linux-next merge of the xen-tip tree got a conflict in: >>> >>> arch/x86/xen/enlighten.c >>> >>> between commits: >>> >>> 6415813bae75 ("x86/cpu: Drop

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

On 29/03/17 10:59, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Juergen Gross wrote: > >> On 29/03/17 05:35, Stephen Rothwell wrote: >>> Hi all, >>> >>> Today's linux-next merge of the xen-tip tree got a conflict in: >>> >>> arch/x86/xen/enlighten.c >>> >>> between commits: >>> >>>

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

On 29/03/17 10:59, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Juergen Gross wrote: > >> On 29/03/17 05:35, Stephen Rothwell wrote: >>> Hi all, >>> >>> Today's linux-next merge of the xen-tip tree got a conflict in: >>> >>> arch/x86/xen/enlighten.c >>> >>> between commits: >>> >>> 6415813bae75 ("x86/cpu: Drop

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

* Juergen Gross wrote: > On 29/03/17 05:35, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > Today's linux-next merge of the xen-tip tree got a conflict in: > > > > arch/x86/xen/enlighten.c > > > > between commits: > > > > 6415813bae75 ("x86/cpu: Drop wp_works_ok member of

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

* Juergen Gross wrote: > On 29/03/17 05:35, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > Today's linux-next merge of the xen-tip tree got a conflict in: > > > > arch/x86/xen/enlighten.c > > > > between commits: > > > > 6415813bae75 ("x86/cpu: Drop wp_works_ok member of struct

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

On 29/03/17 05:35, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi all, > > Today's linux-next merge of the xen-tip tree got a conflict in: > > arch/x86/xen/enlighten.c > > between commits: > > 6415813bae75 ("x86/cpu: Drop wp_works_ok member of struct cpuinfo_x86") > 69218e47994d ("x86: Remap GDT tables in

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

On 29/03/17 05:35, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi all, > > Today's linux-next merge of the xen-tip tree got a conflict in: > > arch/x86/xen/enlighten.c > > between commits: > > 6415813bae75 ("x86/cpu: Drop wp_works_ok member of struct cpuinfo_x86") > 69218e47994d ("x86: Remap GDT tables in

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

Hi all, On Wed, 29 Mar 2017 14:36:18 +1100 Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > Today's linux-next merge of the xen-tip tree got a conflict in: > > arch/x86/xen/mmu.c > > between commits: > > 69218e47994d ("x86: Remap GDT tables in the fixmap section") > 907cd4390290

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

Hi all, On Wed, 29 Mar 2017 14:36:18 +1100 Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > Today's linux-next merge of the xen-tip tree got a conflict in: > > arch/x86/xen/mmu.c > > between commits: > > 69218e47994d ("x86: Remap GDT tables in the fixmap section") > 907cd4390290 ("x86/xen: Change

linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

Hi all, Today's linux-next merge of the xen-tip tree got a conflict in: arch/x86/xen/mmu.c between commits: 69218e47994d ("x86: Remap GDT tables in the fixmap section") 907cd4390290 ("x86/xen: Change __xen_pgd_walk() and xen_cleanmfnmap() to support p4d") f2a6a7050109 ("x86: Convert

linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

Hi all, Today's linux-next merge of the xen-tip tree got a conflict in: arch/x86/xen/mmu.c between commits: 69218e47994d ("x86: Remap GDT tables in the fixmap section") 907cd4390290 ("x86/xen: Change __xen_pgd_walk() and xen_cleanmfnmap() to support p4d") f2a6a7050109 ("x86: Convert

linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

Hi all, Today's linux-next merge of the xen-tip tree got a conflict in: arch/x86/xen/enlighten.c between commits: 6415813bae75 ("x86/cpu: Drop wp_works_ok member of struct cpuinfo_x86") 69218e47994d ("x86: Remap GDT tables in the fixmap section") b23adb7d3f7d ("x86/xen/gdt: Use

linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

Hi all, Today's linux-next merge of the xen-tip tree got a conflict in: arch/x86/xen/enlighten.c between commits: 6415813bae75 ("x86/cpu: Drop wp_works_ok member of struct cpuinfo_x86") 69218e47994d ("x86: Remap GDT tables in the fixmap section") b23adb7d3f7d ("x86/xen/gdt: Use

linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

Hi all, Today's linux-next merge of the xen-tip tree got a conflict in: include/linux/cpuhotplug.h between commit: dfc616d8b3df ("cpuidle/coupled: Convert to hotplug state machine") 68e694dcef24 ("powerpc/powermac: Convert to hotplug state machine") da3ed6519b19 ("powerpc/mmu nohash:

linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

Hi all, Today's linux-next merge of the xen-tip tree got a conflict in: include/linux/cpuhotplug.h between commit: dfc616d8b3df ("cpuidle/coupled: Convert to hotplug state machine") 68e694dcef24 ("powerpc/powermac: Convert to hotplug state machine") da3ed6519b19 ("powerpc/mmu nohash:

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

On 07/26/2016 12:01 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi all, > > Today's linux-next merge of the xen-tip tree got a conflict in: > > arch/x86/xen/enlighten.c > > between commit: > > 4c9075835511 ("xen/x86: Move irq allocation from Xen smp_op.cpu_up()") > > from the tip tree and commit: > >

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

On 07/26/2016 12:01 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi all, > > Today's linux-next merge of the xen-tip tree got a conflict in: > > arch/x86/xen/enlighten.c > > between commit: > > 4c9075835511 ("xen/x86: Move irq allocation from Xen smp_op.cpu_up()") > > from the tip tree and commit: > >

linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

Hi all, Today's linux-next merge of the xen-tip tree got a conflict in: arch/x86/xen/smp.c between commit: 4c9075835511 ("xen/x86: Move irq allocation from Xen smp_op.cpu_up()") from the tip tree and commit: ad5475f9faf5 ("x86/xen: use xen_vcpu_id mapping for HYPERVISOR_vcpu_op") from

linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

Hi all, Today's linux-next merge of the xen-tip tree got a conflict in: arch/x86/xen/smp.c between commit: 4c9075835511 ("xen/x86: Move irq allocation from Xen smp_op.cpu_up()") from the tip tree and commit: ad5475f9faf5 ("x86/xen: use xen_vcpu_id mapping for HYPERVISOR_vcpu_op") from

linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

Hi all, Today's linux-next merge of the xen-tip tree got a conflict in: arch/x86/xen/enlighten.c between commit: 4c9075835511 ("xen/x86: Move irq allocation from Xen smp_op.cpu_up()") from the tip tree and commit: 88e957d6e47f ("xen: introduce xen_vcpu_id mapping") from the xen-tip

linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

Hi all, Today's linux-next merge of the xen-tip tree got a conflict in: arch/x86/xen/enlighten.c between commit: 4c9075835511 ("xen/x86: Move irq allocation from Xen smp_op.cpu_up()") from the tip tree and commit: 88e957d6e47f ("xen: introduce xen_vcpu_id mapping") from the xen-tip

linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

Hi all, Today's linux-next merge of the xen-tip tree got a conflict in: arch/arm/xen/enlighten.c between commit: 4761adb6f490 ("arm/xen: Convert to hotplug state machine") from the tip tree and commit: ecb23dc6f2ef ("xen: add steal_clock support on x86") from the xen-tip tree. I

linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

Hi all, Today's linux-next merge of the xen-tip tree got a conflict in: arch/arm/xen/enlighten.c between commit: 4761adb6f490 ("arm/xen: Convert to hotplug state machine") from the tip tree and commit: ecb23dc6f2ef ("xen: add steal_clock support on x86") from the xen-tip tree. I

linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

Hi all, Today's linux-next merge of the xen-tip tree got a conflict in: drivers/firmware/efi/arm-runtime.c between commit: 14c43be60166 ("efi/arm*: Drop writable mapping of the UEFI System table") from the tip tree and commit: 21c8dfaa2327 ("Xen: EFI: Parse DT parameters for Xen

linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

Hi all, Today's linux-next merge of the xen-tip tree got a conflict in: drivers/firmware/efi/arm-runtime.c between commit: 14c43be60166 ("efi/arm*: Drop writable mapping of the UEFI System table") from the tip tree and commit: 21c8dfaa2327 ("Xen: EFI: Parse DT parameters for Xen

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

* Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 02:44:52PM -0400, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: > > On 08/12/2015 02:36 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > >On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 11:26:41AM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > > >>One option might be to do the addition in assembly, i.e.: > > >> > > >>"i"

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

* Peter Zijlstra pet...@infradead.org wrote: On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 02:44:52PM -0400, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: On 08/12/2015 02:36 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 11:26:41AM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote: One option might be to do the addition in assembly, i.e.: i

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 02:44:52PM -0400, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: > On 08/12/2015 02:36 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > >On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 11:26:41AM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > >>One option might be to do the addition in assembly, i.e.: > >> > >>"i" (key), "i" (index) > >> > >>... and put the

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

On 08/12/2015 02:36 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 11:26:41AM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote: One option might be to do the addition in assembly, i.e.: "i" (key), "i" (index) ... and put the addition into the assembly source. Like so? Seems to build on gcc-4.6. Yes, this

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 11:26:41AM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > One option might be to do the addition in assembly, i.e.: > > "i" (key), "i" (index) > > ... and put the addition into the assembly source. Like so? Seems to build on gcc-4.6. --- arch/x86/include/asm/jump_label.h | 8

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

On 08/12/2015 02:26 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote: On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 11:17 AM, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: On 08/12/2015 01:46 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 07:21:05PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 09:27:38AM -0400, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

One option might be to do the addition in assembly, i.e.: "i" (key), "i" (index) ... and put the addition into the assembly source. On August 12, 2015 11:17:17 AM PDT, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: >On 08/12/2015 01:46 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: >> On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 07:21:05PM +0200, Peter

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 11:17 AM, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: > On 08/12/2015 01:46 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: >> >> On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 07:21:05PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: >>> >>> On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 09:27:38AM -0400, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: >>> Incidentally, 11276d53

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

On 08/12/2015 01:46 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 07:21:05PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 09:27:38AM -0400, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: Incidentally, 11276d53 ("locking/static_keys: Add a new static_key interface") breaks old-ish compilers (gcc version

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 07:21:05PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 09:27:38AM -0400, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: > > > Incidentally, 11276d53 ("locking/static_keys: Add a new static_key > > interface") breaks old-ish compilers (gcc version 4.4.4 20100503 (Red Hat > > 4.4.4-2)

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 07:21:05PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 09:27:38AM -0400, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: > > > Incidentally, 11276d53 ("locking/static_keys: Add a new static_key > > interface") breaks old-ish compilers (gcc version 4.4.4 20100503 (Red Hat > > 4.4.4-2)

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 09:27:38AM -0400, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: > Incidentally, 11276d53 ("locking/static_keys: Add a new static_key > interface") breaks old-ish compilers (gcc version 4.4.4 20100503 (Red Hat > 4.4.4-2) (GCC)): > > > > CC arch/x86/kernel/nmi.o > In file included from >

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

On 08/12/2015 01:09 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: Hi all, Today's linux-next merge of the xen-tip tree got a conflict in: arch/x86/xen/enlighten.c between commit: 9261e050b686 ("x86/asm/tsc, x86/paravirt: Remove read_tsc() and read_tscp() paravirt hooks") from the tip tree and commit:

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

On 08/12/2015 01:09 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: Hi all, Today's linux-next merge of the xen-tip tree got a conflict in: arch/x86/xen/enlighten.c between commit: 9261e050b686 (x86/asm/tsc, x86/paravirt: Remove read_tsc() and read_tscp() paravirt hooks) from the tip tree and commit:

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 02:44:52PM -0400, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: On 08/12/2015 02:36 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 11:26:41AM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote: One option might be to do the addition in assembly, i.e.: i (key), i (index) ... and put the addition into the

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 07:21:05PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 09:27:38AM -0400, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: Incidentally, 11276d53 (locking/static_keys: Add a new static_key interface) breaks old-ish compilers (gcc version 4.4.4 20100503 (Red Hat 4.4.4-2) (GCC)):

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

On 08/12/2015 02:26 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote: On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 11:17 AM, Boris Ostrovsky boris.ostrov...@oracle.com wrote: On 08/12/2015 01:46 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 07:21:05PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 09:27:38AM -0400, Boris

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 11:26:41AM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote: One option might be to do the addition in assembly, i.e.: i (key), i (index) ... and put the addition into the assembly source. Like so? Seems to build on gcc-4.6. --- arch/x86/include/asm/jump_label.h | 8 1 file

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

On 08/12/2015 02:36 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 11:26:41AM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote: One option might be to do the addition in assembly, i.e.: i (key), i (index) ... and put the addition into the assembly source. Like so? Seems to build on gcc-4.6. Yes, this builds

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 09:27:38AM -0400, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: Incidentally, 11276d53 (locking/static_keys: Add a new static_key interface) breaks old-ish compilers (gcc version 4.4.4 20100503 (Red Hat 4.4.4-2) (GCC)): CC arch/x86/kernel/nmi.o In file included from

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 07:21:05PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 09:27:38AM -0400, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: Incidentally, 11276d53 (locking/static_keys: Add a new static_key interface) breaks old-ish compilers (gcc version 4.4.4 20100503 (Red Hat 4.4.4-2) (GCC)):

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

On 08/12/2015 01:46 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 07:21:05PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 09:27:38AM -0400, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: Incidentally, 11276d53 (locking/static_keys: Add a new static_key interface) breaks old-ish compilers (gcc version

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 11:17 AM, Boris Ostrovsky boris.ostrov...@oracle.com wrote: On 08/12/2015 01:46 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 07:21:05PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 09:27:38AM -0400, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: Incidentally, 11276d53

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

One option might be to do the addition in assembly, i.e.: i (key), i (index) ... and put the addition into the assembly source. On August 12, 2015 11:17:17 AM PDT, Boris Ostrovsky boris.ostrov...@oracle.com wrote: On 08/12/2015 01:46 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at

linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

Hi all, Today's linux-next merge of the xen-tip tree got a conflict in: arch/x86/xen/enlighten.c between commit: 9261e050b686 ("x86/asm/tsc, x86/paravirt: Remove read_tsc() and read_tscp() paravirt hooks") from the tip tree and commit: cd6f350a5460 ("xen/PMU: Initialization code for

linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

Hi all, Today's linux-next merge of the xen-tip tree got a conflict in: arch/x86/xen/enlighten.c between commit: 9261e050b686 (x86/asm/tsc, x86/paravirt: Remove read_tsc() and read_tscp() paravirt hooks) from the tip tree and commit: cd6f350a5460 (xen/PMU: Initialization code for Xen

linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

Hi all, Today's linux-next merge of the xen-tip tree got a conflict in drivers/xen/events/events_base.c between commit 02893afdd310 ("xen: Get rid of the last irq_desc abuse") from the tip tree and commit 8fb980538510 ("xen: add support for MSI message groups") from the xen-tip tree. I fixed it

linux-next: manual merge of the xen-tip tree with the tip tree

Hi all, Today's linux-next merge of the xen-tip tree got a conflict in drivers/xen/events/events_base.c between commit 02893afdd310 (xen: Get rid of the last irq_desc abuse) from the tip tree and commit 8fb980538510 (xen: add support for MSI message groups) from the xen-tip tree. I fixed it up