[Xen-devel] [linux-linus test] 110016: regressions - FAIL

flight 110016 linux-linus real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/110016/ Regressions :-( Tests which did not succeed and are blocking, including tests which could not be run: test-amd64-i386-libvirt-qemuu-debianhvm-amd64-xsm 9 debian-hvm-install fail REGR. vs. 109994

[Xen-devel] [linux-next test] 110012: regressions - FAIL

flight 110012 linux-next real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/110012/ Regressions :-( Tests which did not succeed and are blocking, including tests which could not be run: test-amd64-i386-xl-qemuu-win10-i386 6 xen-boot fail REGR. vs. 109994

[Xen-devel] [qemu-mainline test] 110013: regressions - trouble: broken/fail/pass

flight 110013 qemu-mainline real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/110013/ Regressions :-( Tests which did not succeed and are blocking, including tests which could not be run: test-armhf-armhf-xl-xsm 3 host-install(3)broken REGR. vs. 109975

[Xen-devel] [PATCH 0/1] xl.cfg man page cleanup and fixes

Hey everyone, so I've made a new round of cleaning and fixing. There was quite some work to be done with this one. And there are a few issues that are left still, but at least not with the general correctness and style of the manual. More info below. I've had to rework the NUMA node examples as

[Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/1] xl.cfg man page cleanup and fixes

From: Armando Vega Signed-off-by: Armando Vega --- docs/man/xl.cfg.pod.5.in | 1103 -- 1 file changed, 586 insertions(+), 517 deletions(-) diff --git a/docs/man/xl.cfg.pod.5.in b/docs/man/xl.cfg.pod.5.in index

[Xen-devel] [ovmf baseline-only test] 71513: tolerable FAIL

This run is configured for baseline tests only. flight 71513 ovmf real [real] http://osstest.xs.citrite.net/~osstest/testlogs/logs/71513/ Failures :-/ but no regressions. Regressions which are regarded as allowable (not blocking): build-amd64-libvirt 5 libvirt-build

[Xen-devel] [xtf test] 110014: all pass - PUSHED

flight 110014 xtf real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/110014/ Perfect :-) All tests in this flight passed as required version targeted for testing: xtf 2bcda1aa60cd0032ea7371037c645b3d87104e21 baseline version: xtf

[Xen-devel] [distros-debian-sid test] 71510: tolerable trouble: blocked/broken/fail/pass

flight 71510 distros-debian-sid real [real] http://osstest.xs.citrite.net/~osstest/testlogs/logs/71510/ Failures :-/ but no regressions. Regressions which are regarded as allowable (not blocking): test-amd64-amd64-amd64-sid-netboot-pvgrub 10 guest-start fail like 71454

[Xen-devel] [linux-4.9 test] 110010: regressions - FAIL

flight 110010 linux-4.9 real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/110010/ Regressions :-( Tests which did not succeed and are blocking, including tests which could not be run: test-armhf-armhf-xl-credit2 6 xen-boot fail REGR. vs. 107358

[Xen-devel] [linux-4.1 baseline-only test] 71509: regressions - trouble: blocked/broken/fail/pass

This run is configured for baseline tests only. flight 71509 linux-4.1 real [real] http://osstest.xs.citrite.net/~osstest/testlogs/logs/71509/ Regressions :-( Tests which did not succeed and are blocking, including tests which could not be run: build-amd64-libvirt 5 libvirt-build

Re: [Xen-devel] (pv)?grub and PVHv2

On Mon, Jun 05, 2017 at 11:55:24AM +0100, George Dunlap wrote: > On Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 10:58 AM, Roger Pau Monné wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 02, 2017 at 11:33:50AM +0200, Marek Marczykowski-Górecki wrote: > >> Hi, > >> > >> Is there any method to boot PVHv2 domain using a kernel

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 0/3] ARM-XEN: Adjustments for __set_phys_to_machine_multi()

On Sun, 4 Jun 2017, SF Markus Elfring wrote: > From: Markus Elfring > Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2017 22:45:54 +0200 > > Three update suggestions were taken into account > from static source code analysis. > > Markus Elfring (3): > Improve a size determination > Delete

[Xen-devel] [ovmf test] 110011: all pass - PUSHED

flight 110011 ovmf real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/110011/ Perfect :-) All tests in this flight passed as required version targeted for testing: ovmf 5225084439bd47f2cdd210a98d6a445a2eccc9e2 baseline version: ovmf

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 3/3] arm/xen: Adjust one function call together with a variable assignment

On Sun, 4 Jun 2017, SF Markus Elfring wrote: > From: Markus Elfring > Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2017 21:21:20 +0200 > > The script "checkpatch.pl" pointed information out like the following. > > ERROR: do not use assignment in if condition > > Thus fix the affected source

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/3] arm/xen: Improve a size determination in __set_phys_to_machine_multi()

On Sun, 4 Jun 2017, SF Markus Elfring wrote: > From: Markus Elfring > Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2017 20:50:55 +0200 > > Replace the specification of a data structure by a pointer dereference > as the parameter for the operator "sizeof" to make the corresponding size >

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen-evtchn: Bind dyn evtchn:qemu-dm interrupt to next online VCPU

On 05/06/17 17:46, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: +static void evtchn_bind_interdom_next_vcpu(int evtchn) +{ + unsigned int selected_cpu, irq; + struct irq_desc *desc = NULL; < Oh, thanks. I will send out a V2, with the modifications. -Anoob.

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH for-next v3 12/22] x86/traps: move send_guest_trap to pv/traps.c

On Mon, May 29, 2017 at 09:55:14AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote: > >>> On 18.05.17 at 19:09, wrote: > > As said on patch 10(?), this shouldn't be moved alone. And whether > we want to move it in the first place depends on what the PVH > plans here are. > What do you want me to

Re: [Xen-devel] (pv)?grub and PVHv2

On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 1:08 PM, Andrew Cooper wrote: > On 05/06/17 11:55, George Dunlap wrote: >> On Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 10:58 AM, Roger Pau Monné >> wrote: >>> On Fri, Jun 02, 2017 at 11:33:50AM +0200, Marek Marczykowski-Górecki wrote: Hi,

[Xen-devel] [xen-unstable test] 110009: regressions - FAIL

flight 110009 xen-unstable real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/110009/ Regressions :-( Tests which did not succeed and are blocking, including tests which could not be run: test-amd64-amd64-xl-qemut-win7-amd64 15 guest-localmigrate/x10 fail REGR. vs. 109841 Tests

[Xen-devel] [ovmf baseline-only test] 71511: tolerable FAIL

This run is configured for baseline tests only. flight 71511 ovmf real [real] http://osstest.xs.citrite.net/~osstest/testlogs/logs/71511/ Failures :-/ but no regressions. Regressions which are regarded as allowable (not blocking): build-amd64-libvirt 5 libvirt-build

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen-evtchn: Bind dyn evtchn:qemu-dm interrupt to next online VCPU

>> (BTW, I just noticed --- you don't need to initialize desc) > > Sorry, I didn't get it. Which desc doesn't need init ? +static void evtchn_bind_interdom_next_vcpu(int evtchn) +{ + unsigned int selected_cpu, irq; + struct irq_desc *desc = NULL; < + unsigned long flags;

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen-evtchn: Bind dyn evtchn:qemu-dm interrupt to next online VCPU

On 05/06/17 16:32, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: I believe we do need to take affinity into consideration even if the chance that it is non-default is small. Agreed. I am not opposed to having bind_last_selected_cpu percpu, I just wanted to understand the reason better. Additional locking would be

[Xen-devel] VMWare and Linux Foundation.

Hello. VMWare become a gold member of LF and I want to know can it a danger for Xen Project and Citrix XenServer? Xen Project and Citrix XenServer are competitor for VMWare and became a gold member of LF can cause any problem? Thank you. ___

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH for 4.9] vif-common.sh: Have iptables wait for the xtables lock

George Dunlap writes ("[PATCH for 4.9] vif-common.sh: Have iptables wait for the xtables lock"): > iptables has a system-wide lock on the xtables. Strangely though, in > the case of two concurrent invocations, the default is for the > instance not grabbing the lock to exit out rather than

Re: [Xen-devel] Xen 4.9: Release date

Hi all, removed xen-announce I created the following docs https://wiki.xenproject.org/wiki/Category:Xen_4.9 If anyone created any 4.9 specific docs, feel free to add to the page or let me know: I added links to generated 9pfs and pvcalls docs

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen-evtchn: Bind dyn evtchn:qemu-dm interrupt to next online VCPU

On 06/05/2017 10:49 AM, Anoob Soman wrote: > On 05/06/17 15:10, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: >>> The reason for percpu instead of global, was to avoid locking. We can >>> have a global variable (last_cpu) without locking, but value of >>> last_cpu wont be consistent, without locks. Moreover, since >>>

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen-evtchn: Bind dyn evtchn:qemu-dm interrupt to next online VCPU

On 05/06/17 15:10, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: The reason for percpu instead of global, was to avoid locking. We can have a global variable (last_cpu) without locking, but value of last_cpu wont be consistent, without locks. Moreover, since irq_affinity is also used in the calculation of cpu to bind,

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen-evtchn: Bind dyn evtchn:qemu-dm interrupt to next online VCPU

On 06/05/2017 06:14 AM, Anoob Soman wrote: > On 02/06/17 17:24, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: >>> static int set_affinity_irq(struct irq_data *data, const struct >>> cpumask *dest, >>> bool force) >>> diff --git a/drivers/xen/evtchn.c b/drivers/xen/evtchn.c >>> index

[Xen-devel] QEMU XenServer/XenProject Working group meeting 10th May 2017

QEMU XenServer/XenProject Working group meeting 5th May 2017 = Attendees: * Paul Durrant * Andrew Cooper * Ian Jackson * Jenny Herbert * Igor Druzhinin * Simon Crow * Marcus Granado Reviewed previous action points * Paul to carry on

[Xen-devel] [xen-4.9-testing test] 110008: tolerable FAIL - PUSHED

flight 110008 xen-4.9-testing real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/110008/ Failures :-/ but no regressions. Tests which are failing intermittently (not blocking): test-amd64-amd64-libvirt-qemuu-debianhvm-amd64-xsm 9 debian-hvm-install fail in 109995 pass in 110008

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] x86/HVM: correct notion of new CPL in task switch emulation

On 01/06/17 13:11, Jan Beulich wrote: > Commit aac1df3d03 ("x86/HVM: introduce hvm_get_cpl() and respective > hook") went too far in one aspect: When emulating a task switch we > really shouldn't be looking at what hvm_get_cpl() returns, as we're > switching all segment registers. > > However,

[Xen-devel] [linux-linus test] 110006: regressions - FAIL

flight 110006 linux-linus real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/110006/ Regressions :-( Tests which did not succeed and are blocking, including tests which could not be run: test-armhf-armhf-libvirt-xsm 9 debian-install fail REGR. vs. 109994 Tests which did

Re: [Xen-devel] (pv)?grub and PVHv2

On 05/06/17 11:55, George Dunlap wrote: > On Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 10:58 AM, Roger Pau Monné wrote: >> On Fri, Jun 02, 2017 at 11:33:50AM +0200, Marek Marczykowski-Górecki wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> Is there any method to boot PVHv2 domain using a kernel fetched from >>> that

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] x86/NPT: deal with fallout from 2Mb/1Gb unmapping change

On 24/05/17 17:57, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: > On 05/24/2017 06:21 AM, Jan Beulich wrote: > On 24.05.17 at 11:14, wrote: >>> Commit efa9596e9d ("x86/mm: fix incorrect unmapping of 2MB and 1GB >>> pages") left the NPT code untouched, as there is no explicit alignment >>> check

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH for-4.9] Restore HVM_OP hypercall continuation

On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 12:20 PM, George Dunlap wrote: > On 05/06/17 12:18, George Dunlap wrote: >> Commit ae20ccf removed the hypercall continuation logic from the end >> of do_hvm_op(), claiming: >> >> "This patch removes the need for handling HVMOP restarts, so that >>

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH for-4.9] Restore HVM_OP hypercall continuation

On 05/06/17 12:18, George Dunlap wrote: > Commit ae20ccf removed the hypercall continuation logic from the end > of do_hvm_op(), claiming: > > "This patch removes the need for handling HVMOP restarts, so that > infrastructure is removed." > > That turns out to be only half true. The removal of

[Xen-devel] [PATCH for-4.9] Restore HVM_OP hypercall continuation

Commit ae20ccf removed the hypercall continuation logic from the end of do_hvm_op(), claiming: "This patch removes the need for handling HVMOP restarts, so that infrastructure is removed." That turns out to be only half true. The removal of HVMOP_set_mem_type removed the need to store a start

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH for 4.9] vif-common.sh: Have iptables wait for the xtables lock

Forgot to cc' the release manager. On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 11:02 AM, George Dunlap wrote: > iptables has a system-wide lock on the xtables. Strangely though, in > the case of two concurrent invocations, the default is for the > instance not grabbing the lock to exit out

Re: [Xen-devel] (pv)?grub and PVHv2

On Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 10:58 AM, Roger Pau Monné wrote: > On Fri, Jun 02, 2017 at 11:33:50AM +0200, Marek Marczykowski-Górecki wrote: >> Hi, >> >> Is there any method to boot PVHv2 domain using a kernel fetched from >> that domain's disk image, _without_ mounting it in dom0?

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen-evtchn: Bind dyn evtchn:qemu-dm interrupt to next online VCPU

On 02/06/17 17:24, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: static int set_affinity_irq(struct irq_data *data, const struct cpumask *dest, bool force) diff --git a/drivers/xen/evtchn.c b/drivers/xen/evtchn.c index 10f1ef5..1192f24 100644 --- a/drivers/xen/evtchn.c +++

[Xen-devel] [PATCH for 4.9] vif-common.sh: Have iptables wait for the xtables lock

iptables has a system-wide lock on the xtables. Strangely though, in the case of two concurrent invocations, the default is for the instance not grabbing the lock to exit out rather than waiting for it. This means that when starting a large number of guests in parallel, many will fail out with

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen-evtchn: Bind dyn evtchn:qemu-dm interrupt to next online VCPU

On 02/06/17 16:10, Juergen Gross wrote: I'd prefer the to have irq disabled from taking the lock until here. This will avoid problems due to preemption and will be faster as it avoids one irq on/off cycle. So: local_irq_disable(); raw_spin_lock(); ... raw_spin_unlock(); this_cpu_write();

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] x86/PoD: drop a pointless local variable

On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 8:52 AM, Jan Beulich wrote: > ... and move another one into a more narrow scope. > > Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich Acked-by: George Dunlap > > --- a/xen/arch/x86/mm/p2m-pod.c > +++ b/xen/arch/x86/mm/p2m-pod.c

Re: [Xen-devel] [Xen-users] 4.8.1 migration fails over 1st interface, works over 2nd

On 05/06/17 10:17, George Dunlap wrote: > On Mon, May 29, 2017 at 10:04 AM, Andreas Pflug > wrote: >> I've setup a fresh Debian stretch with xen 4.8.1 and shared storage via >> custom block scripts on two machines. >> >> Both machine have one main interface with some

Re: [Xen-devel] [Xen-users] 4.8.1 migration fails over 1st interface, works over 2nd

On Mon, May 29, 2017 at 10:04 AM, Andreas Pflug wrote: > I've setup a fresh Debian stretch with xen 4.8.1 and shared storage via > custom block scripts on two machines. > > Both machine have one main interface with some VLAN stuff, the VM > bridges and the SAN interface

[Xen-devel] [linux-4.9 test] 110003: regressions - FAIL

flight 110003 linux-4.9 real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/110003/ Regressions :-( Tests which did not succeed and are blocking, including tests which could not be run: test-armhf-armhf-xl-credit2 6 xen-boot fail REGR. vs. 107358

[Xen-devel] [PATCH v1] xen: fix HYPERVISOR_dm_op() prototype

Change the third parameter to be the required struct xen_dm_op_buf * instead of a generic void * (which blindly accepts any pointer). Signed-off-by: Sergey Dyasli --- arch/x86/include/asm/xen/hypercall.h | 3 ++- include/xen/arm/hypercall.h | 4 +++- 2 files

[Xen-devel] [ovmf test] 110007: all pass - PUSHED

flight 110007 ovmf real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/110007/ Perfect :-) All tests in this flight passed as required version targeted for testing: ovmf 7ec69844b8f1d348c0699cc88c728acb13ad baseline version: ovmf

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v11 12/23] x86: refactor psr: L3 CAT: set value: implement write msr flow.

On 17-05-30 09:35:53, Jan Beulich wrote: > >>> On 03.05.17 at 10:44, wrote: > > +struct cos_write_info > > +{ > > +unsigned int cos; > > +struct feat_node *feature; > > +uint32_t *val; > > +enum psr_feat_type feat_type; > > +}; > > + > > +static void

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v11 14/23] x86: refactor psr: CDP: implement get hw info flow.

On 17-05-31 03:40:40, Jan Beulich wrote: > >>> On 03.05.17 at 10:44, wrote: > > --- a/xen/arch/x86/psr.c > > +++ b/xen/arch/x86/psr.c > > @@ -207,7 +207,9 @@ static void free_socket_resources(unsigned int socket) > > memset(info->dom_ids, 0, ((DOMID_IDLE + 1) + 7) /

[Xen-devel] [linux-4.1 test] 110002: tolerable FAIL - PUSHED

flight 110002 linux-4.1 real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/110002/ Failures :-/ but no regressions. Tests which are failing intermittently (not blocking): test-amd64-i386-libvirt-xsm 17 guest-start/debian.repeat fail in 109834 pass in 110002