[Xen-devel] [linux-linus test] 139762: regressions - trouble: blocked/broken/fail/pass

2019-08-06 Thread osstest service owner
flight 139762 linux-linus real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/139762/ Regressions :-( Tests which did not succeed and are blocking, including tests which could not be run: test-amd64-i386-libvirt-qemuu-debianhvm-amd64-xsm broken

[Xen-devel] [PATCH v5 02/10] AMD/IOMMU: drop stray "else"

2019-08-06 Thread Jan Beulich
The blank line between it and the prior if() clearly indicates that this was meant to be a standalone if(). Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich --- v5: New. --- a/xen/drivers/passthrough/amd/pci_amd_iommu.c +++ b/xen/drivers/passthrough/amd/pci_amd_iommu.c @@ -166,8 +166,8 @@ static int __init

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 0/3] automation: build Xen in openSUSE Tumbleweed

2019-08-06 Thread Anthony PERARD
On Tue, Aug 06, 2019 at 03:17:26PM +0200, Dario Faggioli wrote: > On Tue, 2019-08-06 at 11:12 +0100, Anthony PERARD wrote: > > with those two I could build a qemu in the tumbleweed container, but > > there are maybe other commit missing. > > > You mean the build is still failing for you, but not

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/4] x86/asm: Include msr-index.h rather than msr.h

2019-08-06 Thread Roger Pau Monné
On Mon, Aug 05, 2019 at 01:42:58PM +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote: > There is nothing interesting for assembly code in msr.h > > Signed-off-by: Andrew Cooper Reviewed-by: Roger Pau Monné If those are the only assembly files including msr.h, could you also get rid of the assembly guard in msr.h?

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/4] x86/asm: Include msr-index.h rather than msr.h

2019-08-06 Thread Andrew Cooper
On 06/08/2019 15:39, Roger Pau Monné wrote: > On Mon, Aug 05, 2019 at 01:42:58PM +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote: >> There is nothing interesting for assembly code in msr.h >> >> Signed-off-by: Andrew Cooper > Reviewed-by: Roger Pau Monné > > If those are the only assembly files including msr.h,

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v5 08/10] x86/PCI: read MSI-X table entry count early

2019-08-06 Thread Jan Beulich
On 06.08.2019 17:16, Roger Pau Monné wrote: On Tue, Aug 06, 2019 at 04:47:28PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote: On 06.08.2019 16:25, Roger Pau Monné wrote: On Tue, Aug 06, 2019 at 03:10:40PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote: @@ -350,6 +353,10 @@ static struct pci_dev *ºalloc_pdev(struct

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 3/4] x86/desc: Shorten boot_{, comat_}gdt[] variable names

2019-08-06 Thread Jan Beulich
On 06.08.2019 16:51, Roger Pau Monné wrote: On Mon, Aug 05, 2019 at 01:43:00PM +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote: The current names, boot_cpu_{,compat_}gdt_table, have a table suffix which is redundant with the T of GDT, and the cpu infix doesn't provide any meaningful context. Drop them both.

[Xen-devel] [PATCH v5 00/10] AMD IOMMU: further improvements

2019-08-06 Thread Jan Beulich
Only the first patch here is left from v4, everything else is new, yet still related. The main goal is to reduce the huge memory overhead that we've noticed. On the way there a number of other things were once again noticed. Unfortunately before I was able to also test the last two patches there,

[Xen-devel] [PATCH] x86/apic: enable x2APIC mode before doing any setup

2019-08-06 Thread Roger Pau Monne
Current code calls apic_x2apic_probe which does some initialization and setup before having enabled x2APIC mode (if it's not already enabled by the firmware). This can lead to issues if the APIC ID doesn't match the x2APIC ID, as apic_x2apic_probe calls init_apic_ldr_x2apic_cluster which

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 0/3] automation: build Xen in openSUSE Tumbleweed

2019-08-06 Thread Dario Faggioli
On Tue, 2019-08-06 at 11:12 +0100, Anthony PERARD wrote: > On Mon, Aug 05, 2019 at 11:44:11AM +0200, Dario Faggioli wrote: > > Anyway, it seems that, in addition to the one I mentioned to > > Anthony a > > few days ago, we also miss this from upstream? > > > > commit

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v5 5/6] xen/x86: add PHYSDEVOP_msi_control

2019-08-06 Thread Roger Pau Monné
On Tue, Aug 06, 2019 at 02:43:49PM +0200, Marek Marczykowski-Górecki wrote: > On Tue, Aug 06, 2019 at 02:05:48PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote: > > On 06.08.2019 12:53, Marek Marczykowski-Górecki wrote: > > > On Tue, Aug 06, 2019 at 12:33:39PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote: > > > > On 06.08.2019 11:46,

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] x86/apic: enable x2APIC mode before doing any setup

2019-08-06 Thread Jan Beulich
On 06.08.2019 15:13, Roger Pau Monne wrote: Current code calls apic_x2apic_probe which does some initialization and setup before having enabled x2APIC mode (if it's not already enabled by the firmware). This can lead to issues if the APIC ID doesn't match the x2APIC ID, as apic_x2apic_probe

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v5 08/10] x86/PCI: read MSI-X table entry count early

2019-08-06 Thread Jan Beulich
On 06.08.2019 16:25, Roger Pau Monné wrote: On Tue, Aug 06, 2019 at 03:10:40PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote: @@ -1093,22 +1094,17 @@ static void __pci_disable_msi(struct msi **/ static int __pci_enable_msix(struct msi_info *msi, struct msi_desc **desc) { -int pos, nr_entries;

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 3/4] x86/desc: Shorten boot_{, comat_}gdt[] variable names

2019-08-06 Thread Roger Pau Monné
On Mon, Aug 05, 2019 at 01:43:00PM +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote: > The current names, boot_cpu_{,compat_}gdt_table, have a table suffix which is > redundant with the T of GDT, and the cpu infix doesn't provide any meaningful > context. Drop them both. > > Likewise, shorten the {,compat_}gdt{,_l1e}

[Xen-devel] [PATCH v5 08/10] x86/PCI: read MSI-X table entry count early

2019-08-06 Thread Jan Beulich
Rather than doing this every time we set up interrupts for a device anew (and then in two distinct places) fill this invariant field right after allocating struct arch_msix. While at it also obtain the MSI-X capability structure position just once, in msix_capability_init(), rather than in each

[Xen-devel] [PATCH v5 09/10] AMD/IOMMU: replace INTREMAP_ENTRIES

2019-08-06 Thread Jan Beulich
Prepare for the number of entries to not be the maximum possible, by separating checks against maximum size from ones against actual size. For caller side simplicity have alloc_intremap_entry() return the maximum possible value upon allocation failure, rather than the first just out-of-bounds

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v5 08/10] x86/PCI: read MSI-X table entry count early

2019-08-06 Thread Roger Pau Monné
On Tue, Aug 06, 2019 at 03:10:40PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote: > Rather than doing this every time we set up interrupts for a device > anew (and then in two distinct places) fill this invariant field > right after allocating struct arch_msix. > > While at it also obtain the MSI-X capability

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/4] x86/asm: Include msr-index.h rather than msr.h

2019-08-06 Thread Jan Beulich
On 06.08.2019 16:39, Roger Pau Monné wrote: On Mon, Aug 05, 2019 at 01:42:58PM +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote: There is nothing interesting for assembly code in msr.h Signed-off-by: Andrew Cooper Reviewed-by: Roger Pau Monné Acked-by: Jan Beulich

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v5 08/10] x86/PCI: read MSI-X table entry count early

2019-08-06 Thread Roger Pau Monné
On Tue, Aug 06, 2019 at 04:47:28PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote: > On 06.08.2019 16:25, Roger Pau Monné wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 06, 2019 at 03:10:40PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote: > > > --- a/xen/drivers/passthrough/pci.c > > > +++ b/xen/drivers/passthrough/pci.c > > > @@ -324,6 +324,7 @@ static void

[Xen-devel] [PATCH v5 03/10] AMD/IOMMU: don't free shared IRT multiple times

2019-08-06 Thread Jan Beulich
Calling amd_iommu_free_intremap_table() for every IVRS entry is correct only in per-device-IRT mode. Use a NULL 2nd argument to indicate that the shared table should be freed, and call the function exactly once in shared mode. Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich --- v5: New. ---

[Xen-devel] [PATCH v5 01/10] AMD/IOMMU: miscellaneous DTE handling adjustments

2019-08-06 Thread Jan Beulich
First and foremost switch boolean fields to bool. Adjust a few related function parameters as well. Then - in amd_iommu_set_intremap_table() don't use literal numbers, - in iommu_dte_add_device_entry() use a compound literal instead of many assignments, - in amd_iommu_setup_domain_device() -

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v6 1/2] xen/arm: extend fdt_property_interrupts to support DomU

2019-08-06 Thread Volodymyr Babchuk
Hi Viktor, Viktor Mitin writes: > Extend fdt_property_interrupts to deal with other domain than the hwdom. > > The prototype of fdt_property_interrupts() has been modified > to support both hwdom and domU in one function. > > This is a preparatory for the next patch which consolidates >

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 4/4] x86/desc: Build boot_{, compat_}gdt[] in C

2019-08-06 Thread Roger Pau Monné
On Mon, Aug 05, 2019 at 01:43:01PM +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote: > ... where we can at least get the compiler to fill in the surrounding space > without having to do it manually. This also reults in the symbols having > proper type/size information in the debug symbols. > > Reorder 'raw' in the

[Xen-devel] [PATCH v5 10/10] AMD/IOMMU: restrict interrupt remapping table sizes

2019-08-06 Thread Jan Beulich
There's no point setting up tables with more space than a PCI device can use. For both MSI and MSI-X we can determine how many interrupts could be set up at most. Tables allocated during ACPI table parsing, however, will (for now at least) continue to be set up to have maximum size. Note that

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v5 5/6] xen/x86: add PHYSDEVOP_msi_control

2019-08-06 Thread Jan Beulich
On 06.08.2019 14:43, Marek Marczykowski-Górecki wrote: On Tue, Aug 06, 2019 at 02:05:48PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote: On 06.08.2019 12:53, Marek Marczykowski-Górecki wrote: On Tue, Aug 06, 2019 at 12:33:39PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote: On 06.08.2019 11:46, Marek Marczykowski-Górecki wrote: On

[Xen-devel] [xen-unstable-smoke test] 139765: tolerable all pass - PUSHED

2019-08-06 Thread osstest service owner
flight 139765 xen-unstable-smoke real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/139765/ Failures :-/ but no regressions. Tests which did not succeed, but are not blocking: test-amd64-amd64-libvirt 13 migrate-support-checkfail never pass test-armhf-armhf-xl

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v6 2/2] xen/arm: consolidate make_timer_node and make_timer_domU_node

2019-08-06 Thread Volodymyr Babchuk
Hi Viktor, Viktor Mitin writes: > Functions make_timer_node and make_timer_domU_node are quite similar. > So it is better to consolidate them to avoid discrepancy. > The main difference between the functions is the timer interrupts used. > > Keep the domU version for the compatible as it is

[Xen-devel] [PATCH v5 07/10] AMD/IOMMU: make phantom functions share interrupt remapping tables

2019-08-06 Thread Jan Beulich
Rather than duplicating entries in amd_iommu_msi_msg_update_ire(), share the tables. This mainly requires some care while freeing them, to avoid freeing memory blocks twice. Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich --- v5: New. --- a/xen/drivers/passthrough/amd/iommu_init.c +++

[Xen-devel] [PATCH v5 06/10] AMD/IOMMU: don't blindly allocate interrupt remapping tables

2019-08-06 Thread Jan Beulich
ACPI tables are free to list far more device coordinates than there are actual devices. By delaying the table allocations for most cases, and doing them only when an actual device is known to be present at a given position, overall memory used for the tables goes down from over 500k pages to just

Re: [Xen-devel] [RFC 1/6] xen/arm: Re-enable interrupt later in the trap path

2019-08-06 Thread Andrii Anisov
Hello Dario, Please see my comments below: On 03.08.19 03:55, Dario Faggioli wrote: On Fri, 2019-08-02 at 16:07 +0300, Andrii Anisov wrote: On 02.08.19 12:15, Julien Grall wrote: From the list below it is not clear what is the split between hypervisor time and guest time. See some of the

[Xen-devel] [PATCH v5 04/10] AMD/IOMMU: introduce a "valid" flag for IVRS mappings

2019-08-06 Thread Jan Beulich
For us to no longer blindly allocate interrupt remapping tables for everything the ACPI tables name, we can't use struct ivrs_mappings' intremap_table field anymore to also have the meaning of "this entry is valid". Add a separate boolean field instead. Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich --- v5: New.

[Xen-devel] [PATCH v5 05/10] AMD/IOMMU: let callers of amd_iommu_alloc_intremap_table() handle errors

2019-08-06 Thread Jan Beulich
Additional users of the function will want to handle errors more gracefully. Remove the BUG_ON()s and make the current caller panic() instead. Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich --- v5: New. --- a/xen/drivers/passthrough/amd/iommu_acpi.c +++ b/xen/drivers/passthrough/amd/iommu_acpi.c @@ -86,6 +86,10

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH RFC 1/2] scripts: Add script to do the repetitive bits of the release process

2019-08-06 Thread George Dunlap
On 8/5/19 11:57 AM, Ian Jackson wrote: > Hi. Thanks for looking into this. Sorry about the delay to the > review. I found it, unsent, while recovering a crashed mailreader > session... Thanks for the review -- I was going to come back and ping this at some point; it would be nice to have it in

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 2/4] x86/boot: Minor improvements to efi_arch_post_exit_boot()

2019-08-06 Thread Jan Beulich
On 05.08.2019 14:42, Andrew Cooper wrote: Split up the long asm block by commenting the logical subsections. The movabs for obtaining __start_xen can be a rip-relative lea instead. This has the added advantage that objdump can now cross reference it during disassembly. I'm surprised this

Re: [Xen-devel] [RFC PATCH 0/2] XEN booting on i.MX8M platform

2019-08-06 Thread NathanStuder
On 8/5/19 4:38 AM, Julien Grall wrote: > CAUTION: This email originated from outside the organization. Do not click > links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the > content is safe. > > Hi, > > I have CCed one person from Donerworks. IIRC they have been using the

[Xen-devel] [xen-unstable-smoke test] 139770: tolerable all pass - PUSHED

2019-08-06 Thread osstest service owner
flight 139770 xen-unstable-smoke real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/139770/ Failures :-/ but no regressions. Tests which did not succeed, but are not blocking: test-amd64-amd64-libvirt 13 migrate-support-checkfail never pass test-arm64-arm64-xl-xsm

[Xen-devel] SWAPGSAttack and CVE-2019-1125

2019-08-06 Thread Andrew Cooper
Hello, With the embargo up, you'll surely all be pleased to see that this is not a zeroday XSA. https://www.bitdefender.com/SWAPGSAttack There are two issues here. 1) Spectre attacks against SWAPGS in interrupt/exception handlers This has been assigned CVE-2019-1125 and affects all 64bit

[Xen-devel] [xen-unstable test] 139740: regressions - FAIL

2019-08-06 Thread osstest service owner
flight 139740 xen-unstable real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/139740/ Regressions :-( Tests which did not succeed and are blocking, including tests which could not be run: test-amd64-amd64-xl-pvhv2-amd 7 xen-bootfail REGR. vs. 139714

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 4/4] x86/desc: Build boot_{, compat_}gdt[] in C

2019-08-06 Thread Jan Beulich
On 05.08.2019 14:43, Andrew Cooper wrote: --- a/xen/arch/x86/boot/x86_64.S +++ b/xen/arch/x86/boot/x86_64.S @@ -43,44 +43,11 @@ ENTRY(__high_start) multiboot_ptr: .long 0 -.word 0 -GLOBAL(boot_gdtr) -.word LAST_RESERVED_GDT_BYTE -.quad boot_gdt -

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 01/34] mm/gup: add make_dirty arg to put_user_pages_dirty_lock()

2019-08-06 Thread Ira Weiny
On Sun, Aug 04, 2019 at 03:48:42PM -0700, john.hubb...@gmail.com wrote: > From: John Hubbard > > Provide a more capable variation of put_user_pages_dirty_lock(), > and delete put_user_pages_dirty(). This is based on the > following: > > 1. Lots of call sites become simpler if a bool is passed >

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 4/6] make passthrough/pci.c:deassign_device() static

2019-08-06 Thread Jan Beulich
On 30.07.2019 15:44, Paul Durrant wrote: This function is only ever called from within the same source module and really has no business being declared xen/iommu.h. This patch relocates the function ahead of the first called and makes it static. Signed-off-by: Paul Durrant Acked-by: Jan

[Xen-devel] [PATCH v2] 9pfs has a QEMU backend

2019-08-06 Thread Stefano Stabellini
Add 9pfs to the kind of PV drivers that has a QEMU backend, specifically to the macro QEMU_BACKEND. This is needed otherwise upon domain destroy we get a timeout error: libxl: error: libxl_device.c:1132:device_backend_callback: Domain 1:unable to remove device with path

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 12/12] AMD/IOMMU: miscellaneous DTE handling adjustments

2019-08-06 Thread Woods, Brian
On Thu, Jul 25, 2019 at 01:33:50PM +, Jan Beulich wrote: > First and foremost switch boolean fields to bool. Adjust a few related > function parameters as well. Then > - in amd_iommu_set_intremap_table() don't use literal numbers, > - in iommu_dte_add_device_entry() use a compound literal

[Xen-devel] [ovmf test] 139751: all pass - PUSHED

2019-08-06 Thread osstest service owner
flight 139751 ovmf real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/139751/ Perfect :-) All tests in this flight passed as required version targeted for testing: ovmf 76e40d7be239893dbf9844515392779c3ab2fba0 baseline version: ovmf

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v3 3/6] xen/arm: keep track of reserved-memory regions

2019-08-06 Thread Stefano Stabellini
On Wed, 10 Jul 2019, Julien Grall wrote: > Hi, > > On 7/8/19 8:02 PM, Oleksandr wrote: > > On 22.06.19 02:56, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > > I have tested this series and got the same behavior as with V2 [1]. > > > > The "non-reserved-memory" node in my device-tree > >

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH V2 3/6] [RFC] xen/common: Introduce _xrealloc function

2019-08-06 Thread Oleksandr
On 05.08.19 13:02, Jan Beulich wrote: Hi, Jan While I can see why having a re-allocation function may be handy, explicit / direct use of _xmalloc() and _xzalloc() are discouraged, in favor of the more type-safe underscore-less variants. took into account I can't see though how a

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v3 5/6] xen/arm: don't iomem_permit_access for reserved-memory regions

2019-08-06 Thread Stefano Stabellini
On Tue, 9 Jul 2019, Oleksandr wrote: > > On 22.06.19 02:56, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > > Hi, Stefano > > > Don't allow reserved-memory regions to be remapped into any guests, > > until reserved-memory regions are properly supported in Xen. For now, > > do not call iomem_permit_access for them.

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH V2 3/6] [RFC] xen/common: Introduce _xrealloc function

2019-08-06 Thread Volodymyr Babchuk
Hi Jan, Jan Beulich writes: > On 02.08.2019 18:39, Oleksandr Tyshchenko wrote: >> --- a/xen/common/xmalloc_tlsf.c >> +++ b/xen/common/xmalloc_tlsf.c >> @@ -610,6 +610,27 @@ void *_xzalloc(unsigned long size, unsigned long align) >> return p ? memset(p, 0, size) : p; >> } >> >> +void

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v5 01/10] AMD/IOMMU: miscellaneous DTE handling adjustments

2019-08-06 Thread Woods, Brian
On Tue, Aug 06, 2019 at 03:07:48PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote: > First and foremost switch boolean fields to bool. Adjust a few related > function parameters as well. Then > - in amd_iommu_set_intremap_table() don't use literal numbers, > - in iommu_dte_add_device_entry() use a compound literal

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] passthrough/amd: Drop "IOMMU not found" message

2019-08-06 Thread Woods, Brian
On Mon, Aug 05, 2019 at 05:44:30PM +0100, Andy Cooper wrote: > Since c/s 9fa94e10585 "x86/ACPI: also parse AMD IOMMU tables early", this > function is unconditionally called in all cases where a DMAR ACPI table > doesn't exist. > > As a consequnce, "AMD-Vi: IOMMU not found!" is printed in all

[Xen-devel] [linux-4.14 test] 139743: tolerable FAIL - PUSHED

2019-08-06 Thread osstest service owner
flight 139743 linux-4.14 real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/139743/ Failures :-/ but no regressions. Tests which did not succeed, but are not blocking: test-amd64-i386-xl-pvshim12 guest-start fail never pass test-amd64-amd64-libvirt-xsm 13

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 01/34] mm/gup: add make_dirty arg to put_user_pages_dirty_lock()

2019-08-06 Thread John Hubbard
On 8/6/19 10:39 AM, Ira Weiny wrote: > On Sun, Aug 04, 2019 at 03:48:42PM -0700, john.hubb...@gmail.com wrote: >> From: John Hubbard ... >> - >> /** >> - * put_user_pages_dirty() - release and dirty an array of gup-pinned pages >> - * @pages: array of pages to be marked dirty and released. >> +

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v3 3/6] xen/arm: keep track of reserved-memory regions

2019-08-06 Thread Stefano Stabellini
On Wed, 10 Jul 2019, Julien Grall wrote: > Hi, > > On 6/22/19 12:56 AM, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > > As we parse the device tree in Xen, keep track of the reserved-memory > > regions as they need special treatment (follow-up patches will make use > > of the stored information.) > > > > Reuse

Re: [Xen-devel] [RFC PATCH 0/2] XEN booting on i.MX8M platform

2019-08-06 Thread Amit Tomer
Hi Nate , Hi Julien, > > Amit, > > Have you checked out the NXP Xen fork? > > https://source.codeaurora.org/external/imx/imx-xen/ > > While the work there hasn't been upstreamed yet, the support for the > iMX8QM > (QuadMax) is fairly complete. There are some important

[Xen-devel] [libvirt test] 139756: regressions - FAIL

2019-08-06 Thread osstest service owner
flight 139756 libvirt real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/139756/ Regressions :-( Tests which did not succeed and are blocking, including tests which could not be run: test-arm64-arm64-libvirt-qcow2 15 guest-start/debian.repeat fail REGR. vs. 139688 Tests which did

[Xen-devel] [linux-linus bisection] complete test-amd64-i386-xl-qemuu-win10-i386

2019-08-06 Thread osstest service owner
branch xen-unstable xenbranch xen-unstable job test-amd64-i386-xl-qemuu-win10-i386 testid xen-boot Tree: linux git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git Tree: linuxfirmware git://xenbits.xen.org/osstest/linux-firmware.git Tree: ovmf

Re: [Xen-devel] [RFC PATCH 0/2] XEN booting on i.MX8M platform

2019-08-06 Thread Amit Tomer
Hi > > What are the consequences to change the interrupt parent? I am not entirely sure about it at the moment but looks like it controllers power domain for various devices like GPU, VPU and OTG etc. So, we may not be able to support these devices for XEN domains ? Also, this IP is not

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v3 6/6] xen/arm: add reserved-memory regions to the dom0 memory node

2019-08-06 Thread Stefano Stabellini
On Wed, 10 Jul 2019, Julien Grall wrote: > Hi Stefano, > > On 6/22/19 12:56 AM, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > > Reserved memory regions are automatically remapped to dom0. Their device > > tree nodes are also added to dom0 device tree. However, the dom0 memory > > node is not currently extended to

[Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 1/7] xen/arm: extend device_tree_for_each_node

2019-08-06 Thread Stefano Stabellini
Add new parameters to device_tree_for_each_node: node, depth, address_cells, size_cells. Node is the parent node to start the search from; depth is the min depth of the search (the depth of the parent node); address_cells and size_cells are the respective parameters at the parent node. Passing 0,

[Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 0/7] reserved-memory in dom0

2019-08-06 Thread Stefano Stabellini
Hi all, This patch series introduces partial reserved-memory support for dom0 only (no domU support for reserved-memory yet.) The following changes since commit 45ce5b8749a220ad7c4ce5d5eba7c201a9418078: mm: Safe to clear PGC_allocated on xenheap pages without an extra reference (2019-08-06

[Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 3/7] xen/arm: keep track of reserved-memory regions

2019-08-06 Thread Stefano Stabellini
As we parse the device tree in Xen, keep track of the reserved-memory regions as they need special treatment (follow-up patches will make use of the stored information.) Reuse process_memory_node to add reserved-memory regions to the bootinfo.reserved_mem array. Refuse to continue once we reach

[Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 4/7] xen/arm: early_print_info print reserved_mem

2019-08-06 Thread Stefano Stabellini
Improve early_print_info to also print the banks saved in bootinfo.reserved_mem. Print them right after RESVD, increasing the same index. Signed-off-by: Stefano Stabellini --- Changes in v4: - new patch --- xen/arch/arm/bootfdt.c | 9 - 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

[Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 2/7] xen/arm: make process_memory_node a device_tree_node_func

2019-08-06 Thread Stefano Stabellini
Change the signature of process_memory_node to match device_tree_node_func. Thanks to this change, the next patch will be able to use device_tree_for_each_node to call process_memory_node on all the children of a provided node. Return error if there is no reg property, remove printk. Return error

Re: [Xen-devel] [BUG] After upgrade to Xen 4.12.0 iommu=no-igfx

2019-08-06 Thread Roman Shaposhnik
On Tue, Aug 6, 2019 at 9:18 AM Roger Pau Monné wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 02, 2019 at 10:05:40AM +0200, Roger Pau Monné wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 01, 2019 at 11:25:04AM -0700, Roman Shaposhnik wrote: > > > This patch completely fixes the problem for me! > > > > > > Thanks Roger! I'd love to see this in

[Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 5/7] xen/arm: handle reserved-memory in consider_modules and dt_unreserved_regions

2019-08-06 Thread Stefano Stabellini
reserved-memory regions overlap with memory nodes. The overlapping memory is reserved-memory and should be handled accordingly: consider_modules and dt_unreserved_regions should skip these regions the same way they are already skipping mem-reserve regions. Signed-off-by: Stefano Stabellini

[Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 6/7] xen/arm: don't iomem_permit_access for reserved-memory regions

2019-08-06 Thread Stefano Stabellini
Don't allow reserved-memory regions to be remapped into any guests, until reserved-memory regions are properly supported in Xen. For now, do not call iomem_permit_access for them. Signed-off-by: Stefano Stabellini --- Changes in v4: - compare the parent name with reserved-memory - use

[Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 7/7] xen/arm: add reserved-memory regions to the dom0 memory node

2019-08-06 Thread Stefano Stabellini
Reserved memory regions are automatically remapped to dom0. Their device tree nodes are also added to dom0 device tree. However, the dom0 memory node is not currently extended to cover the reserved memory regions ranges as required by the spec. This commit fixes it. Change make_memory_node to

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v3 1/5] xen: add a p2mt parameter to map_mmio_regions

2019-08-06 Thread Stefano Stabellini
On Wed, 19 Jun 2019, Jan Beulich wrote: > >>> On 19.06.19 at 01:20, wrote: > > Add a p2mt parameter to map_mmio_regions, pass p2m_mmio_direct_dev on > > ARM and p2m_mmio_direct on x86 -- no changes in behavior. On x86, > > introduce a macro to strip away the last parameter and rename the > >

[Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen/arm: unbreak arm64 build

2019-08-06 Thread Stefano Stabellini
Commit 4941bfbf11eae05c92aa3242e353d173974ce7bf "xen/arm64: macros: Introduce an assembly macro to alias x30" moved lr .reqx30 to macros.h, and started to use "lr" in head.S. However, it didn't add an #include macros.h to head.S. This commit fixes it. Signed-off-by: Stefano

[Xen-devel] [linux-4.19 test] 139753: regressions - FAIL

2019-08-06 Thread osstest service owner
flight 139753 linux-4.19 real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/139753/ Regressions :-( Tests which did not succeed and are blocking, including tests which could not be run: build-armhf-pvops 6 kernel-build fail REGR. vs. 129313

[Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 4/6] libxc: introduce xc_domain_mem_map_policy

2019-08-06 Thread Stefano Stabellini
Introduce a new libxc function that makes use of the new memory_policy parameter added to the XEN_DOMCTL_memory_mapping hypercall. The parameter values are the same for the XEN_DOMCTL_memory_mapping hypercall (0 is MEMORY_POLICY_DEFAULT). Pass MEMORY_POLICY_DEFAULT by default -- no changes in

[Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 2/6] xen: add a p2mt parameter to map_mmio_regions

2019-08-06 Thread Stefano Stabellini
Add a p2mt parameter to map_mmio_regions, pass p2m_mmio_direct_dev on ARM and p2m_mmio_direct on x86 -- no changes in behavior. On x86, introduce a macro to strip away the last parameter and rename the existing implementation of map_mmio_regions to map_mmio_region. Use map_mmio_region in vpci as

[Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 0/6] iomem memory policy

2019-08-06 Thread Stefano Stabellini
Hi all, This series introduces a memory policy parameter for the iomem option, so that we can map an iomem region into a guest as cacheable memory. (Other things related to reserved-memory on Arm have been sent separately.) Cheers, Stefano The following changes since commit

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v3 1/5] xen: add a p2mt parameter to map_mmio_regions

2019-08-06 Thread Stefano Stabellini
On Wed, 10 Jul 2019, Julien Grall wrote: > Hi Stefano, > > The Arm code looks good to me. One comment below. Should I take it as a acked-by? > On 6/19/19 12:20 AM, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > > diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/p2m.c b/xen/arch/arm/p2m.c > > index e28ea1c85a..d88df11e09 100644 > > ---

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v3 2/5] xen: extend XEN_DOMCTL_memory_mapping to handle memory policy

2019-08-06 Thread Stefano Stabellini
On Wed, 10 Jul 2019, Julien Grall wrote: > Hi, > > On 6/19/19 12:20 AM, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > > Reuse the existing padding field to pass memory policy information. On > > Arm, the caller can specify whether the memory should be mapped as > > Device-nGnRE (Device Memory on Armv7) at stage-2,

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v3 2/5] xen: extend XEN_DOMCTL_memory_mapping to handle memory policy

2019-08-06 Thread Stefano Stabellini
On Wed, 19 Jun 2019, Jan Beulich wrote: > >>> On 19.06.19 at 01:20, wrote: > > --- a/tools/libxc/xc_domain.c > > +++ b/tools/libxc/xc_domain.c > > @@ -2070,6 +2070,7 @@ int xc_domain_memory_mapping( > > domctl.cmd = XEN_DOMCTL_memory_mapping; > > domctl.domain = domid; > >

[Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 5/6] libxl/xl: add memory policy option to iomem

2019-08-06 Thread Stefano Stabellini
Add a new memory policy option for the iomem parameter. Possible values are: - arm_dev_nGnRE, Device-nGnRE, the default on Arm - arm_mem_WB, WB cachable memory - default Store the parameter in a new field in libxl_iomem_range. Pass the memory policy option to xc_domain_mem_map_policy. Do the

[Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 3/6] xen: extend XEN_DOMCTL_memory_mapping to handle memory policy

2019-08-06 Thread Stefano Stabellini
Reuse the existing padding field to pass memory policy information. On Arm, the caller can specify whether the memory should be mapped as Device-nGnRE (Device Memory on Armv7) at stage-2, which is the default and the only possibility today, or cacheable memory write-back. The resulting memory

[Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 6/6] xen/arm: clarify the support status of iomem configurations

2019-08-06 Thread Stefano Stabellini
iomem settings fall under the broader category of "Non-PCI device passthrough": they are not security supported. Make it clearer. Signed-off-by: Stefano Stabellini CC: t...@xen.org CC: konrad.w...@oracle.com CC: Julien Grall CC: jbeul...@suse.com CC: andrew.coop...@citrix.com CC:

[Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 1/6] xen/arm: introduce p2m_is_mmio

2019-08-06 Thread Stefano Stabellini
Add a p2m_is_mmio macro for easy checkings. Signed-off-by: Stefano Stabellini --- xen/include/asm-arm/p2m.h | 6 ++ 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+) diff --git a/xen/include/asm-arm/p2m.h b/xen/include/asm-arm/p2m.h index 03f2ee75c1..31902317da 100644 --- a/xen/include/asm-arm/p2m.h +++

[Xen-devel] [PATCH v3 01/41] mm/gup: add make_dirty arg to put_user_pages_dirty_lock()

2019-08-06 Thread john . hubbard
From: John Hubbard Provide a more capable variation of put_user_pages_dirty_lock(), and delete put_user_pages_dirty(). This is based on the following: 1. Lots of call sites become simpler if a bool is passed into put_user_page*(), instead of making the call site choose which put_user_page*()

[Xen-devel] [PATCH v3 14/41] vmci: convert put_page() to put_user_page*()

2019-08-06 Thread john . hubbard
From: John Hubbard For pages that were retained via get_user_pages*(), release those pages via the new put_user_page*() routines, instead of via put_page() or release_pages(). This is part a tree-wide conversion, as described in commit fc1d8e7cca2d ("mm: introduce put_user_page*(), placeholder

[Xen-devel] [PATCH v3 02/41] drivers/gpu/drm/via: convert put_page() to put_user_page*()

2019-08-06 Thread john . hubbard
From: John Hubbard For pages that were retained via get_user_pages*(), release those pages via the new put_user_page*() routines, instead of via put_page() or release_pages(). This is part a tree-wide conversion, as described in commit fc1d8e7cca2d ("mm: introduce put_user_page*(), placeholder

[Xen-devel] [PATCH v3 17/41] staging/vc04_services: convert put_page() to put_user_page*()

2019-08-06 Thread john . hubbard
From: John Hubbard For pages that were retained via get_user_pages*(), release those pages via the new put_user_page*() routines, instead of via put_page() or release_pages(). This is part a tree-wide conversion, as described in commit fc1d8e7cca2d ("mm: introduce put_user_page*(), placeholder

[Xen-devel] [PATCH v3 20/41] fbdev/pvr2fb: convert put_page() to put_user_page*()

2019-08-06 Thread john . hubbard
From: John Hubbard For pages that were retained via get_user_pages*(), release those pages via the new put_user_page*() routines, instead of via put_page() or release_pages(). This is part a tree-wide conversion, as described in commit fc1d8e7cca2d ("mm: introduce put_user_page*(), placeholder

[Xen-devel] [PATCH v3 06/41] x86/kvm: convert put_page() to put_user_page*()

2019-08-06 Thread john . hubbard
From: John Hubbard For pages that were retained via get_user_pages*(), release those pages via the new put_user_page*() routines, instead of via put_page(). This is part a tree-wide conversion, as described in commit fc1d8e7cca2d ("mm: introduce put_user_page*(), placeholder versions"). Cc:

[Xen-devel] [PATCH v3 22/41] xen: convert put_page() to put_user_page*()

2019-08-06 Thread john . hubbard
From: John Hubbard For pages that were retained via get_user_pages*(), release those pages via the new put_user_page*() routines, instead of via put_page() or release_pages(). This is part a tree-wide conversion, as described in commit fc1d8e7cca2d ("mm: introduce put_user_page*(), placeholder

[Xen-devel] [PATCH v3 18/41] drivers/tee: convert put_page() to put_user_page*()

2019-08-06 Thread john . hubbard
From: John Hubbard For pages that were retained via get_user_pages*(), release those pages via the new put_user_page*() routines, instead of via put_page() or release_pages(). This is part a tree-wide conversion, as described in commit fc1d8e7cca2d ("mm: introduce put_user_page*(), placeholder

[Xen-devel] [PATCH v3 05/41] net/ceph: convert put_page() to put_user_page*()

2019-08-06 Thread john . hubbard
From: John Hubbard For pages that were retained via get_user_pages*(), release those pages via the new put_user_page*() routines, instead of via put_page() or release_pages(). This is part a tree-wide conversion, as described in commit fc1d8e7cca2d ("mm: introduce put_user_page*(), placeholder

[Xen-devel] [PATCH v3 00/39] put_user_pages(): miscellaneous call sites

2019-08-06 Thread john . hubbard
From: John Hubbard Hi, This consolidates everything into a "here's what's remaining for Andrew to add to his tree (for now)" series: * The first patch is an updated version of one that is already in the akpm tree. * The next two patches are already in the akpm tree, included here for

[Xen-devel] [PATCH v3 25/41] uprobes: convert put_page() to put_user_page*()

2019-08-06 Thread john . hubbard
From: John Hubbard For pages that were retained via get_user_pages*(), release those pages via the new put_user_page*() routines, instead of via put_page() or release_pages(). This is part a tree-wide conversion, as described in commit fc1d8e7cca2d ("mm: introduce put_user_page*(), placeholder

[Xen-devel] [PATCH v3 03/41] net/xdp: convert put_page() to put_user_page*()

2019-08-06 Thread john . hubbard
From: John Hubbard For pages that were retained via get_user_pages*(), release those pages via the new put_user_page*() routines, instead of via put_page() or release_pages(). This is part a tree-wide conversion, as described in commit fc1d8e7cca2d ("mm: introduce put_user_page*(), placeholder

[Xen-devel] [PATCH v3 15/41] rapidio: convert put_page() to put_user_page*()

2019-08-06 Thread john . hubbard
From: John Hubbard For pages that were retained via get_user_pages*(), release those pages via the new put_user_page*() routines, instead of via put_page() or release_pages(). This is part a tree-wide conversion, as described in commit fc1d8e7cca2d ("mm: introduce put_user_page*(), placeholder

[Xen-devel] [PATCH v3 12/41] genwqe: convert put_page() to put_user_page*()

2019-08-06 Thread john . hubbard
From: John Hubbard For pages that were retained via get_user_pages*(), release those pages via the new put_user_page*() routines, instead of via put_page() or release_pages(). This is part a tree-wide conversion, as described in commit fc1d8e7cca2d ("mm: introduce put_user_page*(), placeholder

[Xen-devel] [PATCH v3 13/41] scif: convert put_page() to put_user_page*()

2019-08-06 Thread john . hubbard
From: John Hubbard For pages that were retained via get_user_pages*(), release those pages via the new put_user_page*() routines, instead of via put_page() or release_pages(). This is part a tree-wide conversion, as described in commit fc1d8e7cca2d ("mm: introduce put_user_page*(), placeholder

[Xen-devel] [PATCH v3 08/41] drm/i915: convert put_page() to put_user_page*()

2019-08-06 Thread john . hubbard
From: John Hubbard For pages that were retained via get_user_pages*(), release those pages via the new put_user_page*() routines, instead of via put_page() or release_pages(). This is part a tree-wide conversion, as described in commit fc1d8e7cca2d ("mm: introduce put_user_page*(), placeholder

[Xen-devel] [PATCH v3 10/41] media/ivtv: convert put_page() to put_user_page*()

2019-08-06 Thread john . hubbard
From: John Hubbard For pages that were retained via get_user_pages*(), release those pages via the new put_user_page*() routines, instead of via put_page() or release_pages(). This is part a tree-wide conversion, as described in commit fc1d8e7cca2d ("mm: introduce put_user_page*(), placeholder

[Xen-devel] [PATCH v3 31/41] mm/process_vm_access.c: convert put_page() to put_user_page*()

2019-08-06 Thread john . hubbard
From: John Hubbard For pages that were retained via get_user_pages*(), release those pages via the new put_user_page*() routines, instead of via put_page() or release_pages(). This is part a tree-wide conversion, as described in commit fc1d8e7cca2d ("mm: introduce put_user_page*(), placeholder

[Xen-devel] [PATCH v3 35/41] kernel/events/core.c: convert put_page() to put_user_page*()

2019-08-06 Thread john . hubbard
From: John Hubbard For pages that were retained via get_user_pages*(), release those pages via the new put_user_page*() routines, instead of via put_page() or release_pages(). This is part a tree-wide conversion, as described in commit fc1d8e7cca2d ("mm: introduce put_user_page*(), placeholder

[Xen-devel] [PATCH v3 32/41] crypt: convert put_page() to put_user_page*()

2019-08-06 Thread john . hubbard
From: John Hubbard For pages that were retained via get_user_pages*(), release those pages via the new put_user_page*() routines, instead of via put_page() or release_pages(). This is part a tree-wide conversion, as described in commit fc1d8e7cca2d ("mm: introduce put_user_page*(), placeholder

  1   2   >