On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 11:37:14PM +0200, Halil Pasic wrote:
> On Wed, 10 Jun 2020 14:25:54 +1000
> David Gibson wrote:
>
> > > > I'm going to definitely have a good look at that. What I think special
> > > > about s390 is that F_ACCESS_PLATFORM is hurting us because all IO needs
> > > > to go
On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 03:57:03PM +0200, Halil Pasic wrote:
> On Wed, 10 Jun 2020 14:29:29 +1000
> David Gibson wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Jun 09, 2020 at 06:28:39PM +0200, Halil Pasic wrote:
> > > On Tue, 9 Jun 2020 17:47:47 +0200
> > > Claudio Imbrenda wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Tue, 9 Jun 2020
On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 03:19:22PM +0200, Viktor Mihajlovski wrote:
>
>
> On 6/10/20 12:24 PM, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> > On 10.06.20 12:07, David Gibson wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 09:22:45AM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> > > > On 10.06.20 06:31, David Gibson wrote:
> > > > > On
On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 12:24:14PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 10.06.20 12:07, David Gibson wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 09:22:45AM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> >> On 10.06.20 06:31, David Gibson wrote:
> >>> On Tue, Jun 09, 2020 at 12:44:39PM -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>
On Wed, 10 Jun 2020 14:25:54 +1000
David Gibson wrote:
> > > I'm going to definitely have a good look at that. What I think special
> > > about s390 is that F_ACCESS_PLATFORM is hurting us because all IO needs
> > > to go through ZONE_DMA (this is a problem of the implementation that
> > >
On 10.06.20 15:19, Viktor Mihajlovski wrote:
>
>
> On 6/10/20 12:24 PM, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>> On 10.06.20 12:07, David Gibson wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 09:22:45AM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
On 10.06.20 06:31, David Gibson wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 09, 2020 at 12:44:39PM
On Wed, 10 Jun 2020 14:29:29 +1000
David Gibson wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 09, 2020 at 06:28:39PM +0200, Halil Pasic wrote:
> > On Tue, 9 Jun 2020 17:47:47 +0200
> > Claudio Imbrenda wrote:
> >
> > > On Tue, 9 Jun 2020 11:41:30 +0200
> > > Halil Pasic wrote:
> > >
> > > [...]
> > >
> > > > I
On Wed, 10 Jun 2020 12:24:14 +0200
David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 10.06.20 12:07, David Gibson wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 09:22:45AM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> >> On 10.06.20 06:31, David Gibson wrote:
> >>> On Tue, Jun 09, 2020 at 12:44:39PM -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>
On Tue, 9 Jun 2020 18:05:59 +0200
Cornelia Huck wrote:
> Which devices are compatible in the end? It seems the only ones that
> are known to be working are virtio-ccw devices with IOMMU_PLATFORM on.
> virtio-pci devices and non-virtio ccw (vfio-ccw, 3270) seem to be out,
> as far as I understand
On 6/10/20 12:24 PM, David Hildenbrand wrote:
On 10.06.20 12:07, David Gibson wrote:
On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 09:22:45AM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
On 10.06.20 06:31, David Gibson wrote:
On Tue, Jun 09, 2020 at 12:44:39PM -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Tue, Jun 09, 2020 at
On Tue, 9 Jun 2020 12:44:39 -0400
"Michael S. Tsirkin" wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 09, 2020 at 06:28:39PM +0200, Halil Pasic wrote:
> > On Tue, 9 Jun 2020 17:47:47 +0200
> > Claudio Imbrenda wrote:
> >
> > > On Tue, 9 Jun 2020 11:41:30 +0200
> > > Halil Pasic wrote:
> > >
> > > [...]
> > >
> > > >
On 10.06.20 12:07, David Gibson wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 09:22:45AM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>> On 10.06.20 06:31, David Gibson wrote:
>>> On Tue, Jun 09, 2020 at 12:44:39PM -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Tue, Jun 09, 2020 at 06:28:39PM +0200, Halil Pasic wrote:
> On
On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 09:22:45AM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 10.06.20 06:31, David Gibson wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 09, 2020 at 12:44:39PM -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> >> On Tue, Jun 09, 2020 at 06:28:39PM +0200, Halil Pasic wrote:
> >>> On Tue, 9 Jun 2020 17:47:47 +0200
> >>>
On 10.06.20 06:31, David Gibson wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 09, 2020 at 12:44:39PM -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 09, 2020 at 06:28:39PM +0200, Halil Pasic wrote:
>>> On Tue, 9 Jun 2020 17:47:47 +0200
>>> Claudio Imbrenda wrote:
>>>
On Tue, 9 Jun 2020 11:41:30 +0200
Halil
On Tue, Jun 09, 2020 at 06:28:39PM +0200, Halil Pasic wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Jun 2020 17:47:47 +0200
> Claudio Imbrenda wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 9 Jun 2020 11:41:30 +0200
> > Halil Pasic wrote:
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > > I don't know. Janosch could answer that, but he is on vacation. Adding
> > >
On Tue, Jun 09, 2020 at 08:44:02AM +0200, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> On Mon, 8 Jun 2020 19:00:45 +0200
> Halil Pasic wrote:
>
>
> > > I'm also not 100% sure about migration... would it make sense to
> > > discuss all of this in the context of the cross-arch patchset? It seems
> > > power has
On Tue, Jun 09, 2020 at 12:44:39PM -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 09, 2020 at 06:28:39PM +0200, Halil Pasic wrote:
> > On Tue, 9 Jun 2020 17:47:47 +0200
> > Claudio Imbrenda wrote:
> >
> > > On Tue, 9 Jun 2020 11:41:30 +0200
> > > Halil Pasic wrote:
> > >
> > > [...]
> > >
> >
On Tue, 9 Jun 2020 18:05:59 +0200
Cornelia Huck wrote:
> >
> > do we really have that many incompatible devices?
>
> Which devices are compatible in the end? It seems the only ones that
> are known to be working are virtio-ccw devices with IOMMU_PLATFORM on.
> virtio-pci devices and
On Tue, Jun 09, 2020 at 05:47:47PM +0200, Claudio Imbrenda wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Jun 2020 11:41:30 +0200
> Halil Pasic wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > I don't know. Janosch could answer that, but he is on vacation. Adding
> > Claudio maybe he can answer. My understanding is, that while it might
> > be
On Tue, Jun 09, 2020 at 06:28:39PM +0200, Halil Pasic wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Jun 2020 17:47:47 +0200
> Claudio Imbrenda wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 9 Jun 2020 11:41:30 +0200
> > Halil Pasic wrote:
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > > I don't know. Janosch could answer that, but he is on vacation. Adding
> > >
On Tue, 9 Jun 2020 17:47:47 +0200
Claudio Imbrenda wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Jun 2020 11:41:30 +0200
> Halil Pasic wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > I don't know. Janosch could answer that, but he is on vacation. Adding
> > Claudio maybe he can answer. My understanding is, that while it might
> > be possible,
On Tue, 9 Jun 2020 17:47:47 +0200
Claudio Imbrenda wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Jun 2020 11:41:30 +0200
> Halil Pasic wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > I don't know. Janosch could answer that, but he is on vacation. Adding
> > Claudio maybe he can answer. My understanding is, that while it might
> > be possible,
On Tue, 9 Jun 2020 11:41:30 +0200
Halil Pasic wrote:
[...]
> I don't know. Janosch could answer that, but he is on vacation. Adding
> Claudio maybe he can answer. My understanding is, that while it might
> be possible, it is ugly at best. The ability to do a transition is
> indicated by a CPU
On 2020-06-09 11:41, Halil Pasic wrote:
On Tue, 9 Jun 2020 08:44:02 +0200
Cornelia Huck wrote:
On Mon, 8 Jun 2020 19:00:45 +0200
Halil Pasic wrote:
...snip...
I mean, can a virtio devices without IOMMU_PLATFORM act as a transition
blocker (i.e. an attempt by a guest to move to pv
On Tue, 9 Jun 2020 08:44:02 +0200
Cornelia Huck wrote:
> On Mon, 8 Jun 2020 19:00:45 +0200
> Halil Pasic wrote:
>
>
> > > I'm also not 100% sure about migration... would it make sense to
> > > discuss all of this in the context of the cross-arch patchset? It seems
> > > power has similar
On Mon, 8 Jun 2020 19:00:45 +0200
Halil Pasic wrote:
> > I'm also not 100% sure about migration... would it make sense to
> > discuss all of this in the context of the cross-arch patchset? It seems
> > power has similar issues.
> >
>
> I'm going to definitely have a good look at that. What
[..]
> > Let me list some pros and cons (compared to the previous patch):
> >
> > PRO:
> > * Thanks to on/off/auto we don't override what the user specified. From
> > user interface perspective preferable. I usually hate software that
> > thinks its than me and can do the opposite I tell it.
>
On Sat, Jun 06, 2020 at 01:32:17AM +0200, Halil Pasic wrote:
> On Wed, 20 May 2020 12:23:24 -0400
> "Michael S. Tsirkin" wrote:
>
> > On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 12:11:55AM +0200, Halil Pasic wrote:
> > > The virtio specification tells that the device is to present
> > > VIRTIO_F_ACCESS_PLATFORM
On Sat, 6 Jun 2020 01:32:17 +0200
Halil Pasic wrote:
> On Wed, 20 May 2020 12:23:24 -0400
> "Michael S. Tsirkin" wrote:
>
> > On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 12:11:55AM +0200, Halil Pasic wrote:
> > > The virtio specification tells that the device is to present
> > > VIRTIO_F_ACCESS_PLATFORM (a.k.a.
On Wed, 20 May 2020 12:23:24 -0400
"Michael S. Tsirkin" wrote:
> On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 12:11:55AM +0200, Halil Pasic wrote:
> > The virtio specification tells that the device is to present
> > VIRTIO_F_ACCESS_PLATFORM (a.k.a. VIRTIO_F_IOMMU_PLATFORM) when the
> > device "can only access
On Thu, 28 May 2020 16:42:49 +0200
Janosch Frank wrote:
> On 5/28/20 1:21 PM, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> >> I think we have "allow protected" already expressed via cpu models. I'm
> >> also not sure how libvirt would react to the idea of a new machine
> >> property for this. You did mean "allow
On Thu, 28 May 2020 13:21:12 +0200
Cornelia Huck wrote:
> On Fri, 22 May 2020 23:04:51 +0200
> Halil Pasic wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 20 May 2020 12:23:24 -0400
> > "Michael S. Tsirkin" wrote:
[..]
> > > So, how about this: switch iommu to on/off/auto.
> >
> > Many thanks for the reveiw, and
On 5/28/20 1:21 PM, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> On Fri, 22 May 2020 23:04:51 +0200
> Halil Pasic wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 20 May 2020 12:23:24 -0400
>> "Michael S. Tsirkin" wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 12:11:55AM +0200, Halil Pasic wrote:
The virtio specification tells that the device is
On Fri, 22 May 2020 23:04:51 +0200
Halil Pasic wrote:
> On Wed, 20 May 2020 12:23:24 -0400
> "Michael S. Tsirkin" wrote:
>
> > On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 12:11:55AM +0200, Halil Pasic wrote:
> > > The virtio specification tells that the device is to present
> > > VIRTIO_F_ACCESS_PLATFORM
On Wed, 20 May 2020 12:23:24 -0400
"Michael S. Tsirkin" wrote:
> On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 12:11:55AM +0200, Halil Pasic wrote:
> > The virtio specification tells that the device is to present
> > VIRTIO_F_ACCESS_PLATFORM (a.k.a. VIRTIO_F_IOMMU_PLATFORM) when the
> > device "can only access
On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 12:11:55AM +0200, Halil Pasic wrote:
> The virtio specification tells that the device is to present
> VIRTIO_F_ACCESS_PLATFORM (a.k.a. VIRTIO_F_IOMMU_PLATFORM) when the
> device "can only access certain memory addresses with said access
> specified and/or granted by the
On Fri, 15 May 2020 00:11:55 +0200
Halil Pasic wrote:
> The virtio specification tells that the device is to present
> VIRTIO_F_ACCESS_PLATFORM (a.k.a. VIRTIO_F_IOMMU_PLATFORM) when the
> device "can only access certain memory addresses with said access
> specified and/or granted by the
The virtio specification tells that the device is to present
VIRTIO_F_ACCESS_PLATFORM (a.k.a. VIRTIO_F_IOMMU_PLATFORM) when the
device "can only access certain memory addresses with said access
specified and/or granted by the platform". This is the case for a
protected VMs, as the device can
38 matches
Mail list logo
