On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 07:02:24PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> As announced last week by Marcelo Tosatti, I will be co-maintaining
> KVM together with Gleb.
>
Applied, thanks.
> Cc: Marcelo Tosatti
> Cc: Gleb Natapov
> Cc: k...@vger.kernel.org
> Signed-
On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 05:12:55AM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> The benchmark and the result can be found at:
> http://www.spinics.net/lists/kvm/msg91391.html
>
I asked a couple of questions on some patches, but overall this looks
good to me. Marcelo can you look at this too?
> Changlog:
> V6:
On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 05:12:57AM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> Move deletion shadow page from the hash list from kvm_mmu_commit_zap_page to
> kvm_mmu_prepare_zap_page so that we can call kvm_mmu_commit_zap_page
> once for multiple kvm_mmu_prepare_zap_page that can help us to avoid
> unnecessary
On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 05:12:58AM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> The current kvm_mmu_zap_all is really slow - it is holding mmu-lock to
> walk and zap all shadow pages one by one, also it need to zap all guest
> page's rmap and all shadow page's parent spte list. Particularly, things
> become wors
On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 02:39:07AM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> On 05/16/2013 11:57 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
>
> > One more thought. With current patch if zap_invalid_page() will be
> > called second time while another zap_invalid_page() is still running
> > (can that hap
On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 07:51:17PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 11:10:26AM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
> > Hi All,
> >
> > If you boot a KVM guest on an AMD family 15h and specify -cpu host,
> > you'll get the following splat:
> >
> > [0.031000] [ cut here ]
On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 08:17:49PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> Replace kvm_mmu_zap_all by kvm_mmu_invalidate_memslot_pages except on
> the path of mmu_notifier->release() which will be fixed in
> the later patch
>
Why ->release() cannot use kvm_mmu_invalidate_memslot_pages()?
> Signed-off-by:
On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 08:17:48PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> The current kvm_mmu_zap_all is really slow - it is holding mmu-lock to
> walk and zap all shadow pages one by one, also it need to zap all guest
> page's rmap and all shadow page's parent spte list. Particularly, things
> become wors
On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 04:43:21PM +0300, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 09:25:28PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> > On 05/16/2013 08:43 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > > On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 08:17:48PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> > >> The current
On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 09:25:28PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> On 05/16/2013 08:43 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 08:17:48PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> >> The current kvm_mmu_zap_all is really slow - it is holding mmu-lock to
> >> walk and
On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 03:14:35PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 16/05/2013 14:43, Gleb Natapov ha scritto:
> >> > +restart:
> >> > +list_for_each_entry_safe(sp, node, &kvm->arch.active_mmu_pages,
> >> > link) {
>
On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 08:17:48PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> The current kvm_mmu_zap_all is really slow - it is holding mmu-lock to
> walk and zap all shadow pages one by one, also it need to zap all guest
> page's rmap and all shadow page's parent spte list. Particularly, things
> become wors
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 09:43:13PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> Note that at least for user-space, REP MOVS is getting rarer. libc uses
> SSE based memcpy/memset variants - which is not miscounted by PEBS. The
> kernel still uses REP MOVS - but it's a special case because it cannot
> cheaply use
On Thu, May 09, 2013 at 08:53:24PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> CC kvm list.
>
> On 05/09/2013 12:31 PM, David Ahern wrote:
> > With the consolidation of the open counters code in December 2012
> > (late to the party figuring that out) I think all of the past
> > comments on the live mode for pe
fixed
and corruption of xcr0 register.
Asias He (1):
KVM: Fix kvm_irqfd_init initialization
Gleb Natapov (1):
KVM: VMX: fix halt emulation while emulating invalid guest sate
Marcelo Tosatti (1):
KVM: x86: fix maintenance of guest/host xcr0 state
Paolo Bonzini (3):
KVM
On Thu, May 09, 2013 at 11:32:48AM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> These three instructions are not emulated, but can be found in
> real mode code.
>
> These are also good for stable, but they conflict before 3.9 and are
> not really useful since emulate_invalid_guest_state defaulted to false.
> So
On Thu, May 09, 2013 at 11:32:50AM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> This is used by SGABIOS, KVM breaks with emulate_invalid_guest_state=1.
> It is just a MOV in disguise, with a funny source address.
>
> Reported-by: Jun'ichi Nomura
> Cc: sta...@vger.kernel.org # 3.9
> Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini
On Thu, May 09, 2013 at 11:30:27AM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 09/05/2013 11:25, Gleb Natapov ha scritto:
> > On Thu, May 09, 2013 at 11:16:07AM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> >> This is an almost-undocumented instruction available in 32-bit mode.
> >> I say "
On Thu, May 09, 2013 at 11:16:07AM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> This is an almost-undocumented instruction available in 32-bit mode.
> I say "almost" undocumented because AMD documents it in their opcode
> maps just to say that it is unavailable in 64-bit mode (sections
> "A.2.1 One-Byte Opcodes"
On Tue, May 07, 2013 at 12:09:29PM -0300, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> On Tue, May 07, 2013 at 05:56:08PM +0300, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > > > Yes, I am missing what Marcelo means there too. We cannot free memslot
> > > > until we unmap its rmap one way or the other.
>
On Tue, May 07, 2013 at 11:33:29AM -0300, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> On Tue, May 07, 2013 at 01:00:51PM +0300, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > On Tue, May 07, 2013 at 05:41:35PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> > > On 05/07/2013 04:58 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Ma
On Tue, May 07, 2013 at 05:41:35PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> On 05/07/2013 04:58 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > On Tue, May 07, 2013 at 01:45:52AM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> >> On 05/07/2013 01:24 AM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> >>> On Mon, May 06, 2013 at 09:10:11
On Tue, May 07, 2013 at 01:45:52AM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> On 05/07/2013 01:24 AM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > On Mon, May 06, 2013 at 09:10:11PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> >> On 05/06/2013 08:36 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> >>
> >>>>> Step
On Mon, May 06, 2013 at 09:10:11PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> On 05/06/2013 08:36 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
>
> >>> Step 1) Fix kvm_mmu_zap_all's behaviour: introduce lockbreak via
> >>> spin_needbreak. Use generation numbers so that in case kvm_mmu_z
On Mon, May 06, 2013 at 11:39:11AM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> On 05/04/2013 08:52 AM, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> > On Sat, May 04, 2013 at 12:51:06AM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> >> On 05/03/2013 11:53 PM, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> >>> On Fri, May 03, 2013 at 01:52:07PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wro
ations out of x86
KVM: Make local routines static
KVM: Move kvm_spurious_fault to x86.c
KVM: Move kvm_rebooting declaration out of x86
Gleb Natapov (10):
Merge 'git://github.com/agraf/linux-2.6.git kvm-ppc-next' into queue
KVM: emulator: fix unimplemented instr
On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 08:52:56AM -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> On 04/29/13 02:17, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Changes since 20130426:
> >
>
>
> on x86_64:
>
> arch/x86/kvm/x86.c: In function 'kvm_dev_ioctl_check_extension':
> arch/x86/kvm/x86.c:2547:22: error: 'pci_bus_type' u
mit for
> VCPUS can be increased from 254 to 255. (This was confirmed by Gleb Natapov
> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.emulators.kvm.devel/99713 )
>
> Signed-off-by: Chegu Vinod
Applied, thanks.
> ---
> arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h |2 +-
> 1 files changed, 1
On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 01:49:18PM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
> We hope to at some point deprecate KVM legacy device assignment in
> favor of VFIO-based assignment. Towards that end, allow legacy
> device assignment to be deconfigured.
>
> Signed-off-by: Alex Williamson
Applied, thanks.
> --
On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 12:22:01AM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> From: Borislav Petkov
>
> It is "exit_int_info". It is actually EXITINTINFO in the official docs
> but we don't like screaming docs.
>
> Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov
Applied, thanks.
> ---
> arch/x86/kvm/svm.c | 2 +-
> 1 fi
On Mon, Apr 01, 2013 at 05:56:46PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> Define some meaningful names instead of raw code
>
> Signed-off-by: Xiao Guangrong
> ---
> arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c | 15 +--
> arch/x86/kvm/mmu.h | 14 ++
> arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c |4 ++--
> 3 files changed,
On Mon, Apr 01, 2013 at 05:56:49PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> Then it has chance to trigger mmio generation number wrap-around
>
> Signed-off-by: Xiao Guangrong
> ---
> arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h |1 +
> arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c |8
> virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
dress review feedback
> v3: Ignore the bits when no CPUID. No #GP. Force raw events with TSX bits.
> v4: Use reserved bits for #GP
> v5: Remove obsolete argument
> Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen
Acked-by: Gleb Natapov
> ---
> arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h |1 +
&g
On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 08:21:29AM +, Zhanghaoyu (A) wrote:
> >> >> On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 12:00:49PM +, Zhanghaoyu (A) wrote:
> >> >>> I start 10 VMs(windows xp), then running geekbench tool on them,
> >> >>> about 2 days, one of them was reset, I found the reset operation
> >> >>> is d
On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 03:20:28PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> On 04/23/2013 02:28 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 08:19:02AM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> >> On 04/22/2013 05:21 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> >>> On Sun, Apr 21, 2013 at 10:09:29
On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 08:19:02AM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> On 04/22/2013 05:21 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > On Sun, Apr 21, 2013 at 10:09:29PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> >> On 04/21/2013 09:03 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> >>> On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 02:32:38
On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 07:08:06PM -0400, Rik van Riel wrote:
> On 04/22/2013 04:55 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >On Mon, 2013-04-22 at 16:46 -0400, Jiannan Ouyang wrote:
>
> >>- pv-preemptable-lock has much less performance variance compare to
> >>pv_lock, because it adapts to preemption within V
On Sun, Apr 21, 2013 at 12:35:08PM -0300, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 21, 2013 at 12:27:51PM -0300, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> > On Sun, Apr 21, 2013 at 04:03:46PM +0300, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > > On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 02:32:38PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> > &g
On Sun, Apr 21, 2013 at 10:09:29PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> On 04/21/2013 09:03 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 02:32:38PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> >> This patchset is based on my previous two patchset:
> >> [PATCH 0/2] KVM: x86: avoi
On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 02:32:38PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> This patchset is based on my previous two patchset:
> [PATCH 0/2] KVM: x86: avoid potential soft lockup and unneeded mmu reload
> (https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/4/1/2)
>
> [PATCH v2 0/6] KVM: MMU: fast invalid all mmio sptes
> (https:/
On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 01:05:08AM +, Zhanghaoyu (A) wrote:
> >> On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 12:00:49PM +, Zhanghaoyu (A) wrote:
> >>> I start 10 VMs(windows xp), then running geekbench tool on them,
> >>> about 2 days, one of them was reset, I found the reset operation is
> >>> done by int k
On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 11:01:18AM -0300, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 12:42:39PM +0300, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > > > that, but if not then less code is better.
> > >
> > > The number of sp->role.invalid=1 pages is small (only shadow roots).
On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 12:00:49PM +, Zhanghaoyu (A) wrote:
> I start 10 VMs(windows xp), then running geekbench tool on them, about 2
> days, one of them was reset,
> I found the reset operation is done by
> int kvm_cpu_exec(CPUArchState *env)
> {
> ...
>switch (run->exit_reason)
On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 07:22:23PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> On 04/18/2013 07:00 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 02:32:46PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> >> pte_list_clear_concurrently allows us to reset pte-desc entry
> >> out of mmu-lock. W
On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 02:32:46PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> pte_list_clear_concurrently allows us to reset pte-desc entry
> out of mmu-lock. We can reset spte out of mmu-lock if we can protect the
> lifecycle of sp, we use this way to achieve the goal:
>
> unmap_memslot_rmap_nolock():
> for-
On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 05:39:04PM -0300, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 09:15:24PM +0200, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 08:37:33PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> > > On 03/22/2013 08:12 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Ma
On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 01:49:18PM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
> We hope to at some point deprecate KVM legacy device assignment in
> favor of VFIO-based assignment. Towards that end, allow legacy
> device assignment to be deconfigured.
>
> Signed-off-by: Alex Williamson
> "active".
>
> Since the value will always be the same for L1 and L2, we do not need
> to read and write the corresponding VMCS field on L1/L2 transitions,
> either.
>
> Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini
Perfect, thanks!
Reviewed-by: Gleb Natapov
> ---
On Thu, Apr 04, 2013 at 01:27:21PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> PIO and MMIO are separate address spaces, but
> ioeventfd registration code mistakenly detected
> two eventfds as duplicate if they use the same address,
> even if one is PIO and another one MMIO.
>
> Signed-off-by: Michael S. T
Linus,
Please pull from
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/virt/kvm/kvm.git master
To receive the bugfix for the regression introduced by c300aa64ddf57.
Andrew Honig (1):
KVM: Allow cross page reads and writes from cached translations.
arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c |2 -
arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
On Thu, Apr 04, 2013 at 04:14:57PM +0300, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > >
> > >>> is to move to MMIO only when PIO address space is exhausted. For PCI it
> > >>> will be never, for PCI-e it will be after ~16 devices.
> > >>
> > >> Ok,
On Thu, Apr 04, 2013 at 06:36:30PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > processor : 0
> > vendor_id : AuthenticAMD
> > cpu family : 16
> > model : 8
> > model name : Six-Core AMD Opteron(tm) Processor 8435
> > stepping: 0
> > cpu MHz : 800.000
> > cache size : 5
On Thu, Apr 04, 2013 at 05:36:40PM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
> >
> > #define GOAL (1ull << 30)
> >
> >do {
> >iterations *= 2;
> >t1 = rdtsc();
> >
> >for (i = 0; i < iterations; ++i)
> >func();
>
On Thu, Apr 04, 2013 at 03:06:42PM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
>
> On 04.04.2013, at 14:56, Gleb Natapov wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Apr 04, 2013 at 02:49:39PM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
> >>
> >> On 04.04.2013, at 14:45, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> >>
>
On Thu, Apr 04, 2013 at 02:49:39PM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
>
> On 04.04.2013, at 14:45, Gleb Natapov wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Apr 04, 2013 at 02:39:51PM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
> >>
> >> On 04.04.2013, at 14:38, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> >>
>
On Thu, Apr 04, 2013 at 02:39:51PM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
>
> On 04.04.2013, at 14:38, Gleb Natapov wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Apr 04, 2013 at 02:32:08PM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
> >>
> >> On 04.04.2013, at 14:08, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> >>
>
On Thu, Apr 04, 2013 at 02:32:08PM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
>
> On 04.04.2013, at 14:08, Gleb Natapov wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Apr 04, 2013 at 01:57:34PM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
> >>
> >> On 04.04.2013, at 12:50, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> >>
&g
On Thu, Apr 04, 2013 at 02:22:09PM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
>
> On 04.04.2013, at 14:08, Gleb Natapov wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Apr 04, 2013 at 01:57:34PM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
> >>
> >> On 04.04.2013, at 12:50, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> >>
&g
On Thu, Apr 04, 2013 at 02:09:53PM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
>
> On 04.04.2013, at 13:04, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Apr 04, 2013 at 01:57:34PM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
> >>
> >> On 04.04.2013, at 12:50, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> >>
> >>> With KVM, MMIO is much slower than
On Thu, Apr 04, 2013 at 01:57:34PM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
>
> On 04.04.2013, at 12:50, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>
> > With KVM, MMIO is much slower than PIO, due to the need to
> > do page walk and emulation. But with EPT, it does not have to be: we
> > know the address from the VMCS so if
On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 02:14:20PM -0700, Kevin Hilman wrote:
> Gleb Natapov writes:
>
> > On Sun, Mar 24, 2013 at 02:44:26PM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> >> 2013/3/21 Gleb Natapov :
> >> > Isn't is simpler for kernel/context_tracking.c to define emp
On Sun, Mar 24, 2013 at 02:44:26PM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> 2013/3/21 Gleb Natapov :
> > Isn't is simpler for kernel/context_tracking.c to define empty
> > __guest_enter()/__guest_exit() if !CONFIG_KVM.
>
> That doesn't look right. Off-cases are usu
On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 05:02:15PM -0700, Kevin Hilman wrote:
> Gleb Natapov writes:
>
> > On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 02:33:13PM -0500, Scott Wood wrote:
> >> On 03/21/2013 02:16:00 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> >> >On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 01:42:34PM -0500, Scott Wood w
On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 08:37:33PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> On 03/22/2013 08:12 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 08:03:04PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> >> On 03/22/2013 07:47 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> >>> On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 07:39:24
On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 08:03:04PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> On 03/22/2013 07:47 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 07:39:24PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> >> On 03/22/2013 07:28 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> >>> On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 07:10:44
On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 07:39:24PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> On 03/22/2013 07:28 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 07:10:44PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> >> On 03/22/2013 06:54 PM, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> >>
> >>>>
> >>&
On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 07:10:44PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> On 03/22/2013 06:54 PM, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
>
> >>
> >>>
> >>> And then have codepaths that nuke shadow pages break from the spinlock,
> >>
> >> I think this is not needed any more. We can let mmu_notify use the
> >> generation
On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 02:35:50PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Fixes these build error when CONFIG_KVM is not defined:
>
> In file included from arch/powerpc/include/asm/kvm_ppc.h:33:0,
> from arch/powerpc/kernel/setup_64.c:67:
> arch/powerpc/include/asm/kvm_book3s.h:65:20: e
On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 02:33:13PM -0500, Scott Wood wrote:
> On 03/21/2013 02:16:00 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> >On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 01:42:34PM -0500, Scott Wood wrote:
> >> On 03/21/2013 09:27:14 AM, Kevin Hilman wrote:
> >> >Gleb Natapov writes:
> >>
On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 01:42:34PM -0500, Scott Wood wrote:
> On 03/21/2013 09:27:14 AM, Kevin Hilman wrote:
> >Gleb Natapov writes:
> >
> >> On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 06:58:41PM -0500, Scott Wood wrote:
> >>> On 03/14/2013 07:13:46 PM, Kevin Hilman wrote:
>
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 04:30:24PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> Move deletion shadow page from the hash list from kvm_mmu_commit_zap_page to
> kvm_mmu_prepare_zap_page, we that we can free the shadow page out of mmu-lock.
>
> Also, delete the invalid shadow page from the hash list since this pag
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 06:58:41PM -0500, Scott Wood wrote:
> On 03/14/2013 07:13:46 PM, Kevin Hilman wrote:
> >The new context tracking subsystem unconditionally includes kvm_host.h
> >headers for the guest enter/exit macros. This causes a compile
> >failure when KVM is not enabled.
> >
> >Fix by
On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 09:22:33PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 19/03/2013 19:50, Gleb Natapov ha scritto:
> > On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 07:39:24PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> >> Il 19/03/2013 19:13, Gleb Natapov ha scritto:
> >>>>> There is no way for u
On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 07:39:24PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 19/03/2013 19:13, Gleb Natapov ha scritto:
> >> > There is no way for userspace to inject interrupts into a VCPU's
> >> > local APIC, which is important in order to inject INITs coming from
>
On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 04:51:13PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> There is no way for userspace to inject interrupts into a VCPU's
> local APIC, which is important in order to inject INITs coming from
> the chipset. KVM_INTERRUPT is currently disabled when the in-kernel
> local APIC is used, so we
On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 05:41:45PM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> On 2013-03-19 16:43, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 04:30:26PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> >> The CS base was initialized to 0 on VMX (wrong, but usually overridden
> >> by userspace before
d-off-by: Paolo Bonzini
Reviewed-by: Gleb Natapov
> ---
> arch/x86/kvm/svm.c | 8 +---
> arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c | 1 +
> 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/svm.c b/arch/x86/kvm/svm.c
> index 7219a40..7a46c1f 100644
> --- a/arch/x
On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 11:15:36AM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> On 03/19/2013 06:16 AM, Eric Northup wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 8:29 AM, Xiao Guangrong
> > wrote:
> >> This patch tries to introduce a very simple and scale way to invalid all
> >> mmio sptes - it need not walk any shadow p
On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 09:25:10PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> On 03/18/2013 09:19 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 09:09:43PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> >> On 03/18/2013 08:46 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> >>> On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 08:29:29
On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 09:09:43PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> On 03/18/2013 08:46 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 08:29:29PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> >> On 03/18/2013 05:13 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> >>> On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 04:08:50
On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 08:42:09PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> On 03/18/2013 07:19 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> > Il 15/03/2013 16:29, Xiao Guangrong ha scritto:
> >> +/*
> >> + * spte bits of bit 3 ~ bit 11 are used as low 9 bits of
> >> + * generation, the bits of bits 52 ~ bit 61 are used as
>
On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 08:29:29PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> On 03/18/2013 05:13 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 04:08:50PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> >> On 03/17/2013 11:02 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> >>> On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 11:29:53
On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 04:08:50PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> On 03/17/2013 11:02 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 11:29:53PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> >> This patch tries to introduce a very simple and scale way to invalid all
> >> mmio s
On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 11:29:53PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> This patch tries to introduce a very simple and scale way to invalid all
> mmio sptes - it need not walk any shadow pages and hold mmu-lock
>
> KVM maintains a global mmio invalid generation-number which is stored in
> kvm->arch.mmi
On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 10:25:35AM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> On 2013-03-11 20:30, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 08:01:30PM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> >> On 2013-03-11 19:51, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> >>>>> On Intel:
> >>>>>
On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 08:01:30PM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> On 2013-03-11 19:51, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> >>> On Intel:
> >>> CPU 1 CPU 2 in a guest mode
> >>> send INIT
> >>> send SIP
On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 07:47:03PM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> On 2013-03-11 19:39, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 07:27:44PM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> >> On 2013-03-11 19:13, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> >>> On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 07:05:48PM +0100, Jan K
On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 07:27:44PM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> On 2013-03-11 19:13, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 07:05:48PM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> >> On 2013-03-11 18:41, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> >>> On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 06:34:03PM +0100, Jan K
On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 07:05:48PM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> On 2013-03-11 18:41, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 06:34:03PM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> >> On 2013-03-11 18:23, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> >>> On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 04:36:33PM +0100, Jan K
On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 06:39:44PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 11/03/2013 18:20, Gleb Natapov ha scritto:
> > On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 03:28:03PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> >> Il 11/03/2013 14:54, Gleb Natapov ha scritto:
> >>>> Setting the mp_state to INI
On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 06:34:03PM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> On 2013-03-11 18:23, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 04:36:33PM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> >> On 2013-03-11 15:23, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> >>> Il 11/03/2013 15:05, Gleb Natapov ha scritto:
On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 04:36:33PM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> On 2013-03-11 15:23, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> > Il 11/03/2013 15:05, Gleb Natapov ha scritto:
> >> On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 03:01:40PM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> >>>> We are not moving away from mp_sta
On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 03:28:03PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 11/03/2013 14:54, Gleb Natapov ha scritto:
> >> Setting the mp_state to INIT_RECEIVED is that interface, and it already
> >> works, for APs at least. This patch extends it to work for the BSP as
> >
On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 03:10:45PM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> On 2013-03-11 15:09, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 03:06:18PM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> >> On 2013-03-11 15:05, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> >>> On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 03:01:40PM +0100, Jan Ki
On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 03:06:18PM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> On 2013-03-11 15:05, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 03:01:40PM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> >>> We are not moving away from mp_state, we are moving away from using
> >>> mp_state for s
On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 03:01:40PM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> > We are not moving away from mp_state, we are moving away from using
> > mp_state for signaling because with nested virt INIT does not always
> > change mp_state, not only that it can change mp_state long after signal
> > is received af
On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 02:31:46PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 11/03/2013 12:51, Gleb Natapov ha scritto:
> >> >
> >> > Agreed, but we still have the problem of how to signal from userspace.
> >> > For that do you have any other suggestion than mp_st
On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 12:25:57PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 11/03/2013 11:28, Gleb Natapov ha scritto:
> >> Not really true---we do exit with that state and EINTR when we get a
> >> SIPI. Perhaps that can be changed.
> >
> > That's implementation d
On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 11:14:39AM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 10/03/2013 19:10, Gleb Natapov ha scritto:
> > On Sun, Mar 10, 2013 at 06:19:07PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> >> Il 10/03/2013 16:35, Gleb Natapov ha scritto:
> >>>>> However, it would
On Sun, Mar 10, 2013 at 03:46:00PM +0200, Ioan Orghici wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Ioan Orghici
> ---
> arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c |3 +--
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c
> index 7cc566b..35c2c8f 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c
>
401 - 500 of 706 matches
Mail list logo
