09.02.2024 00:21, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
On Thu, 1 Feb 2024 at 06:37, Michael Tokarev wrote:
for (;;) {
-bytes = MIN(size - offset, BDRV_REQUEST_MAX_SECTORS);
+bytes = MIN(size - offset, BDRV_REQUEST_MAX_BYTES);
Hmm. This smells like a -stable material, but you know
On 8/2/24 19:33, BALATON Zoltan wrote:
On Thu, 8 Feb 2024, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
We should not wire IRQs on unrealized device.
Signed-off-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
---
hw/misc/macio/macio.c | 8 +---
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git
On Thu, 1 Feb 2024 at 06:37, Michael Tokarev wrote:
>
> 30.01.2024 03:27, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> > The following expression is incorrect because blk_pread_nonzeroes()
> > deals in units of bytes, not sectors:
> >
> >bytes = MIN(size - offset, BDRV_REQUEST_MAX_SECTORS)
> >
On Wed, 7 Feb 2024 at 04:36, Hanna Czenczek wrote:
>
> On 06.02.24 17:53, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
>
> On Fri, Feb 02, 2024 at 03:47:53PM +0100, Hanna Czenczek wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Without the AioContext lock, a BB's context may kind of change at any
> time (unless it has a root node, and I/O
On 1/25/24 18:46, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote:
> On 11.12.23 13:55, Andrey Drobyshev wrote:
>> In case we're truncating an image opened with O_DIRECT, we might get
>> -EINVAL on write with unaligned buffer. In particular, when running
>> iotests/298 with '-nocache' we get:
>>
>> qemu-io:
On Thu, 8 Feb 2024, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
We should not wire IRQs on unrealized device.
Signed-off-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
---
hw/misc/macio/macio.c | 8 +---
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/hw/misc/macio/macio.c b/hw/misc/macio/macio.c
index
On Thu, 8 Feb 2024, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
We should not wire IRQs on unrealized device.
Signed-off-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
---
hw/i386/pc_q35.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/hw/i386/pc_q35.c b/hw/i386/pc_q35.c
index 7ca3f465e0..f67e5a55df 100644
We should not wire IRQs on unrealized device.
Signed-off-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
---
hw/sparc/sun4m.c | 7 +--
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/hw/sparc/sun4m.c b/hw/sparc/sun4m.c
index e782c8ec7a..d52e6a7213 100644
--- a/hw/sparc/sun4m.c
+++
Inline cpu_create() in order to call
qdev_init_gpio_in_named_with_opaque()
before the CPU is realized.
Signed-off-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
---
hw/sparc/leon3.c | 7 ---
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/hw/sparc/leon3.c b/hw/sparc/leon3.c
index
Inline cpu_create() in order to call
qdev_init_gpio_in_named_with_opaque()
before the CPU is realized.
Signed-off-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
---
hw/sparc64/sparc64.c | 4 +++-
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/hw/sparc64/sparc64.c b/hw/sparc64/sparc64.c
index
We should not wire IRQs on unrealized device.
Signed-off-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
---
hw/sparc/leon3.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/hw/sparc/leon3.c b/hw/sparc/leon3.c
index 2dfb742566..0df5fc949d 100644
--- a/hw/sparc/leon3.c
+++ b/hw/sparc/leon3.c
"qemu/units.h" is not used in the "hw/rx/rx62n.h"
header, include it in the source where it is.
Signed-off-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
---
include/hw/rx/rx62n.h | 1 -
hw/rx/rx-gdbsim.c | 1 +
hw/rx/rx62n.c | 1 +
3 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git
We should not wire IRQs on unrealized device.
Signed-off-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
---
hw/i386/pc_q35.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/hw/i386/pc_q35.c b/hw/i386/pc_q35.c
index 7ca3f465e0..f67e5a55df 100644
--- a/hw/i386/pc_q35.c
+++ b/hw/i386/pc_q35.c
@@
We should not wire IRQs on unrealized device.
Signed-off-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
---
hw/misc/macio/macio.c | 8 +---
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/hw/misc/macio/macio.c b/hw/misc/macio/macio.c
index c9f22f8515..db662a2065 100644
--- a/hw/misc/macio/macio.c
We should not wire IRQs on unrealized device.
Signed-off-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
---
hw/sh4/r2d.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/hw/sh4/r2d.c b/hw/sh4/r2d.c
index e9f316a6ce..c73e8f49b8 100644
--- a/hw/sh4/r2d.c
+++ b/hw/sh4/r2d.c
@@ -285,9 +285,9 @@
We should not wire IRQs on unrealized device.
Signed-off-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
---
hw/ppc/prep.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/hw/ppc/prep.c b/hw/ppc/prep.c
index 1a6cd05c61..4eb5477069 100644
--- a/hw/ppc/prep.c
+++ b/hw/ppc/prep.c
@@ -278,9 +278,9 @@
Instead of filling an array of all the possible IRQs, only call
qdev_get_gpio_in() when an IRQ is used. Remove the array from
RX62NState. Doing so we avoid calling qdev_get_gpio_in() on an
unrealized device.
Signed-off-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
---
include/hw/rx/rx62n.h | 1 -
hw/rx/rx62n.c
Hi,
This series ensure following is called *before* a
device is realized:
- qbus_new()
- sysbus_init_mmio()
- qdev_init_gpio_in_named_with_opaque()
and these are called *after* it is:
- sysbus_mmio_map()
- sysbus_connect_irq(),
- qdev_connect_gpio_out()
- qdev_connect_gpio_out_named()
Patches
QEMU coding style recommend using structure typedefs:
https://www.qemu.org/docs/master/devel/style.html#typedefs
Signed-off-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
---
hw/ide/ich.c | 6 +++---
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/hw/ide/ich.c b/hw/ide/ich.c
index
On Wed, Feb 7, 2024 at 11:18 AM Kevin Wolf wrote:
>
> Am 06.02.2024 um 17:44 hat Eugenio Perez Martin geschrieben:
> > On Mon, Feb 5, 2024 at 2:49 PM Kevin Wolf wrote:
> > >
> > > Am 05.02.2024 um 13:22 hat Eugenio Perez Martin geschrieben:
> > > > On Fri, Feb 2, 2024 at 2:25 PM Kevin Wolf
On 8/2/24 15:28, Peter Maydell wrote:
On Thu, 8 Feb 2024 at 14:22, Kevin Wolf wrote:
Am 08.02.2024 um 11:48 hat Philippe Mathieu-Daudé geschrieben:
BTW using the same pattern:
-- >8 --
diff --git a/hw/nvram/xlnx-zynqmp-efuse.c b/hw/nvram/xlnx-zynqmp-efuse.c
index ec98456e5d..d074762a25
On Thu, 8 Feb 2024 at 14:22, Kevin Wolf wrote:
>
> Am 08.02.2024 um 11:48 hat Philippe Mathieu-Daudé geschrieben:
> > BTW using the same pattern:
> >
> > -- >8 --
> > diff --git a/hw/nvram/xlnx-zynqmp-efuse.c b/hw/nvram/xlnx-zynqmp-efuse.c
> > index ec98456e5d..d074762a25 100644
> > ---
Am 08.02.2024 um 11:48 hat Philippe Mathieu-Daudé geschrieben:
> On 8/2/24 11:16, Kevin Wolf wrote:
> > 'a == b ? false : true' is a rather convoluted way of writing 'a != b'.
> > Use the more obvious way to write it.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf
> > ---
> > iothread.c | 3 +--
> > 1
On Feb 8 21:33, Minwoo Im wrote:
> On 24-02-08 13:22:48, Klaus Jensen wrote:
> > From: Klaus Jensen
> >
> > The number of logical blocks within a source range is converted into a
> > 1s based number at the time of parsing. However, when verifying the copy
> > length we add one again, causing
nvme_copy_source_range_parse(iocb->ranges, idx, iocb->format, NULL,
> , NULL, NULL, NULL);
> -copy_len += nlb + 1;
> +copy_len += nlb;
> }
>
> if (copy_len > ns->id_ns.mcl) {
>
> ---
> base-commit: 39a6e4f87e7b75a45b08d6dc8b8b7c2954c87440
> change-id: 20240208-fix-copy-mcl-check-3a6d95327154
>
> Best regards,
> --
> Klaus Jensen
>
>
> ns->id_ns.mcl) {
---
base-commit: 39a6e4f87e7b75a45b08d6dc8b8b7c2954c87440
change-id: 20240208-fix-copy-mcl-check-3a6d95327154
Best regards,
--
Klaus Jensen
On 8/2/24 11:16, Kevin Wolf wrote:
'a == b ? false : true' is a rather convoluted way of writing 'a != b'.
Use the more obvious way to write it.
Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf
---
iothread.c | 3 +--
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/iothread.c b/iothread.c
index
Le 08/02/2024 à 11:16, Kevin Wolf a écrit :
'a == b ? false : true' is a rather convoluted way of writing 'a != b'.
Use the more obvious way to write it.
Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf
---
iothread.c | 3 +--
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/iothread.c b/iothread.c
'a == b ? false : true' is a rather convoluted way of writing 'a != b'.
Use the more obvious way to write it.
Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf
---
iothread.c | 3 +--
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/iothread.c b/iothread.c
index 6c1fc8c856..e1e9e04736 100644
---
08.02.2024 11:42, Kevin Wolf wrote:
The patch email itself was CCed to qemu-stable and even contained a note
for backporting to stable:
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-block/2024-01/msg00278.html
Ahh. Yes. I'm having a large(ish) queue in stable and missed the fact
I already has
Am 08.02.2024 um 06:37 hat Michael Tokarev geschrieben:
> 06.02.2024 18:31, Stefan Hajnoczi :
> > Requests that complete in an IOThread use irqfd to notify the guest
> > while requests that complete in the main loop thread use the traditional
> > qdev irq code path. The reason for this conditional
31 matches
Mail list logo
