Re: [PATCH v2 06/32] s390: reuse asm-generic/barrier.h

On Mon, 4 Jan 2016 22:42:44 +0200 "Michael S. Tsirkin" wrote: > On Mon, Jan 04, 2016 at 04:03:39PM +0100, Martin Schwidefsky wrote: > > On Mon, 4 Jan 2016 14:20:42 +0100 > > Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > > > On Thu, Dec 31, 2015 at 09:06:30PM +0200, Michael

Re: [PATCH v2 22/32] s390: define __smp_xxx

On Mon, 4 Jan 2016 22:18:58 +0200 "Michael S. Tsirkin" wrote: > On Mon, Jan 04, 2016 at 02:45:25PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 31, 2015 at 09:08:38PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > This defines __smp_xxx barriers for s390, > > > for use by

Re: [PATCH v2 15/32] powerpc: define __smp_xxx

On Tue, Jan 05, 2016 at 09:36:55AM +0800, Boqun Feng wrote: > Hi Michael, > > On Thu, Dec 31, 2015 at 09:07:42PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > This defines __smp_xxx barriers for powerpc > > for use by virtualization. > > > > smp_xxx barriers are removed as they are > > defined correctly

Re: [PATCH v2 22/32] s390: define __smp_xxx

On Tue, Jan 05, 2016 at 09:13:19AM +0100, Martin Schwidefsky wrote: > On Mon, 4 Jan 2016 22:18:58 +0200 > "Michael S. Tsirkin" wrote: > > > On Mon, Jan 04, 2016 at 02:45:25PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > On Thu, Dec 31, 2015 at 09:08:38PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: >

Re: [PATCH v2 15/32] powerpc: define __smp_xxx

On Tue, Jan 05, 2016 at 10:51:17AM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Tue, Jan 05, 2016 at 09:36:55AM +0800, Boqun Feng wrote: > > Hi Michael, > > > > On Thu, Dec 31, 2015 at 09:07:42PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > This defines __smp_xxx barriers for powerpc > > > for use by

Re: [PATCH] net: filter: make JITs zero A for SKF_AD_ALU_XOR_X

On Tue, 2016-01-05 at 16:23 +0100, Rabin Vincent wrote: > The SKF_AD_ALU_XOR_X ancillary is not like the other ancillary data > instructions since it XORs A with X while all the others replace A with > some loaded value. All the BPF JITs fail to clear A if this is used as > the first instruction

Re: [PATCH] net: filter: make JITs zero A for SKF_AD_ALU_XOR_X

On Tue, Jan 05, 2016 at 05:36:47PM +0100, Daniel Borkmann wrote: > On 01/05/2016 04:23 PM, Rabin Vincent wrote: > >The SKF_AD_ALU_XOR_X ancillary is not like the other ancillary data > >instructions since it XORs A with X while all the others replace A with > >some loaded value. All the BPF JITs

Re: [PATCH v2 15/32] powerpc: define __smp_xxx

On Tue, Jan 05, 2016 at 05:53:41PM +0800, Boqun Feng wrote: > On Tue, Jan 05, 2016 at 10:51:17AM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 05, 2016 at 09:36:55AM +0800, Boqun Feng wrote: > > > Hi Michael, > > > > > > On Thu, Dec 31, 2015 at 09:07:42PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > >

Re: [PATCH v2 22/32] s390: define __smp_xxx

On Tue, Jan 05, 2016 at 04:39:37PM +0100, Christian Borntraeger wrote: > On 01/05/2016 10:30 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > > > arch/s390/kernel/vdso.c:smp_mb(); > > > > Looking at > > Author: Christian Borntraeger > > Date: Fri Sep 11 16:23:06

Re: [PATCH] net: filter: make JITs zero A for SKF_AD_ALU_XOR_X

On 01/05/2016 05:03 PM, Rabin Vincent wrote: On Tue, Jan 05, 2016 at 08:00:45AM -0800, Eric Dumazet wrote: On Tue, 2016-01-05 at 16:23 +0100, Rabin Vincent wrote: The SKF_AD_ALU_XOR_X ancillary is not like the other ancillary data instructions since it XORs A with X while all the others

Re: [PATCH] net: filter: make JITs zero A for SKF_AD_ALU_XOR_X

On 01/05/2016 04:23 PM, Rabin Vincent wrote: The SKF_AD_ALU_XOR_X ancillary is not like the other ancillary data instructions since it XORs A with X while all the others replace A with some loaded value. All the BPF JITs fail to clear A if this is used as the first instruction in a filter.

Re: [PATCH v2 22/32] s390: define __smp_xxx

On 01/05/2016 10:30 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > arch/s390/kernel/vdso.c:smp_mb(); > > Looking at > Author: Christian Borntraeger > Date: Fri Sep 11 16:23:06 2015 +0200 > > s390/vdso: use correct memory barrier > > By

Re: [alsa-devel] [PATCH 1/3] ASoC: fsl_ssi: mark SACNT register volatile

Timur, On Thu, Dec 24, 2015 at 2:12 PM, Timur Tabi wrote: > On Sun, Dec 20, 2015 at 2:30 PM, Maciej S. Szmigiero > wrote: >> SACNT register should be marked volatile since >> its WR and RD bits are cleared by SSI after >> completing the relevant

Re: [PATCH v4 2/9] ppc64le FTRACE_WITH_REGS implementation

On Wed, Dec 02, 2015 at 09:18:05AM +1100, Michael Ellerman wrote: > > I (still) haven't had a chance to have a good look at it, but I won't this > week > anyway. So post v5 and hopefully I can review that and it will be perfect :) The perfect v5 is there now, for 4 weeks minus the holiday

Re: [PATCH v2 22/32] s390: define __smp_xxx

On Tue, 5 Jan 2016 15:04:43 +0200 "Michael S. Tsirkin" wrote: > On Tue, Jan 05, 2016 at 01:08:52PM +0100, Martin Schwidefsky wrote: > > On Tue, 5 Jan 2016 11:30:19 +0200 > > "Michael S. Tsirkin" wrote: > > > > > On Tue, Jan 05, 2016 at 09:13:19AM +0100, Martin

Re: [PATCH v2 17/32] arm: define __smp_xxx

On Mon, Jan 04, 2016 at 01:59:34PM +, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Mon, Jan 04, 2016 at 02:54:20PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 04, 2016 at 02:36:58PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > On Sun, Jan 03, 2016 at 11:12:44AM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > > On Sat,

Re: [PATCH v3 0/2] cpufreq: powernv: Redesign the presentation of throttle notification

Shilpasri G Bhat writes: > In POWER8, OCC(On-Chip-Controller) can throttle the frequency of the > CPU when the chip crosses its thermal and power limits. Currently, > powernv-cpufreq driver detects and reports this event as a console > message. Some boxes may not

Re: [PATCH] net: filter: make JITs zero A for SKF_AD_ALU_XOR_X

From: Rabin Vincent Date: Tue, 5 Jan 2016 16:23:07 +0100 > The SKF_AD_ALU_XOR_X ancillary is not like the other ancillary data > instructions since it XORs A with X while all the others replace A with > some loaded value. All the BPF JITs fail to clear A if this is used as > the

[PATCH] net: filter: make JITs zero A for SKF_AD_ALU_XOR_X

The SKF_AD_ALU_XOR_X ancillary is not like the other ancillary data instructions since it XORs A with X while all the others replace A with some loaded value. All the BPF JITs fail to clear A if this is used as the first instruction in a filter. This was found using american fuzzy lop. Add a

Re: [RFC PATCH v2 1/3] PCI: Add support for enforcing all MMIO BARs to be page aligned

On 2016/1/5 4:47, Alex Williamson wrote: On Thu, 2015-12-31 at 16:50 +0800, Yongji Xie wrote: When vfio passthrough a PCI device of which MMIO BARs are smaller than PAGE_SIZE, guest will not handle the mmio accesses to the BARs which leads to mmio emulations in host. This is because vfio will

Re: [PATCH v2 22/32] s390: define __smp_xxx

On Tue, Jan 05, 2016 at 01:08:52PM +0100, Martin Schwidefsky wrote: > On Tue, 5 Jan 2016 11:30:19 +0200 > "Michael S. Tsirkin" wrote: > > > On Tue, Jan 05, 2016 at 09:13:19AM +0100, Martin Schwidefsky wrote: > > > On Mon, 4 Jan 2016 22:18:58 +0200 > > > "Michael S. Tsirkin"

[PATCH 1/2] powerpc: sparse: static-ify some things

As sparse suggests, these should be made static. Signed-off-by: Daniel Axtens --- These are random fixes in arch/powerpc/kernel: there's no real pattern to them. It doesn't fix everything. --- arch/powerpc/kernel/eeh_event.c | 2 +- arch/powerpc/kernel/ibmebus.c | 2 +-

[PATCH 2/2] powerpc: sparse: Include headers for __weak symbols

Sometimes when sparse warns about undefined symbols, it isn't because they should have 'static' added, it's because they're overriding __weak symbols defined elsewhere, and the header has been missed. Fix a few of them by adding appropriate headers. Signed-off-by: Daniel Axtens

Re: [PATCH] net: filter: make JITs zero A for SKF_AD_ALU_XOR_X

On Tue, Jan 05, 2016 at 08:00:45AM -0800, Eric Dumazet wrote: > On Tue, 2016-01-05 at 16:23 +0100, Rabin Vincent wrote: > > The SKF_AD_ALU_XOR_X ancillary is not like the other ancillary data > > instructions since it XORs A with X while all the others replace A with > > some loaded value. All

Re: [PATCH v2 12/32] x86/um: reuse asm-generic/barrier.h

Am 31.12.2015 um 20:07 schrieb Michael S. Tsirkin: > On x86/um CONFIG_SMP is never defined. As a result, several macros > match the asm-generic variant exactly. Drop the local definitions and > pull in asm-generic/barrier.h instead. > > This is in preparation to refactoring this code area. > >

Re: [PATCH v2 22/32] s390: define __smp_xxx

On Tue, 5 Jan 2016 11:30:19 +0200 "Michael S. Tsirkin" wrote: > On Tue, Jan 05, 2016 at 09:13:19AM +0100, Martin Schwidefsky wrote: > > On Mon, 4 Jan 2016 22:18:58 +0200 > > "Michael S. Tsirkin" wrote: > > > > > On Mon, Jan 04, 2016 at 02:45:25PM +0100, Peter

Re: [PATCH v2 15/32] powerpc: define __smp_xxx

On Tue, Jan 05, 2016 at 06:16:48PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: [snip] > > > > Another thing is that smp_lwsync() may have a third user(other than > > > > smp_load_acquire() and smp_store_release()): > > > > > > > > http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.ports.ppc.embedded/89877 > > > > > > >

Re: [PATCH v6 2/4] powerpc: atomic: Implement atomic{, 64}_*_return_* variants

Hi all, I will resend this one to avoid a potential conflict with: http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/2116880 by open coding smp_lwsync() with: __asm__ __volatile__(PPC_ACQUIRE_BARRIER "" : : : "memory"); Regards, Boqun signature.asc Description: PGP signature

[PATCH RESEND v6 2/4] powerpc: atomic: Implement atomic{, 64}_*_return_* variants

On powerpc, acquire and release semantics can be achieved with lightweight barriers("lwsync" and "ctrl+isync"), which can be used to implement __atomic_op_{acquire,release}. For release semantics, since we only need to ensure all memory accesses that issue before must take effects before the

Re: [PATCH 1/2] powerpc: sparse: static-ify some things

On 06/01/16 11:45, Daniel Axtens wrote: As sparse suggests, these should be made static. Signed-off-by: Daniel Axtens Reviewed-by: Andrew Donnellan -- Andrew Donnellan Software Engineer, OzLabs andrew.donnel...@au1.ibm.com