[Xen-devel] [xen-4.8-testing test] 136566: regressions - FAIL

2019-05-21 Thread osstest service owner
flight 136566 xen-4.8-testing real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/136566/ Regressions :-( Tests which did not succeed and are blocking, including tests which could not be run: test-xtf-amd64-amd64-4 50 xtf/test-hvm64-lbr-tsx-vmentry fail REGR. vs. 130965

[Xen-devel] [xen-4.12-testing test] 136564: regressions - FAIL

2019-05-21 Thread osstest service owner
flight 136564 xen-4.12-testing real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/136564/ Regressions :-( Tests which did not succeed and are blocking, including tests which could not be run: test-arm64-arm64-xl 7 xen-boot fail REGR. vs. 136233 Tests which

[Xen-devel] [linux-3.18 bisection] complete test-amd64-amd64-xl-credit2

2019-05-21 Thread osstest service owner
branch xen-unstable xenbranch xen-unstable job test-amd64-amd64-xl-credit2 testid xen-boot Tree: linux git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable.git Tree: linuxfirmware git://xenbits.xen.org/osstest/linux-firmware.git Tree: ovmf git://xenbits.xen.org/osstest/ovmf.git

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v1] x86/mm: Make change_type_range return error

2019-05-21 Thread Alexandru Stefan ISAILA
Hi George, Did you have time to look at this patch? Regards, Alex On 03.05.2019 11:04, Jan Beulich wrote: On 03.05.19 at 09:53, wrote: >> On 25.04.2019 15:54, Jan Beulich wrote: >>> It is an issue anyway that a change is >>> made without saying why the new behavior preferable over >>> the

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen/public: arch-arm: Restrict the visibility of struct vcpu_guest_core_regs

2019-05-21 Thread Jan Beulich
>>> On 20.05.19 at 20:12, wrote: > As this is now Xen and tools only, I am wondering whether the check on > GNU_C is still necessary. I am happy to send a follow-up patch (or fold > in this one) if it can be removed. I think this should be dropped if it can be without breaking any

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH MM-PART2 RESEND v2 04/19] xen/arm: Rework HSCTLR_BASE

2019-05-21 Thread Julien Grall
Hi, On 5/20/19 11:56 PM, Stefano Stabellini wrote: On Tue, 14 May 2019, Julien Grall wrote: The current value of HSCTLR_BASE for Arm64 is pretty wrong. It would actually turn on SCTLR_EL2.nAA (bit 6) on hardware implementing ARMv8.4-LSE. Furthermore, the documentation of what is cleared/set

Re: [Xen-devel] Criteria / validation proposal: drop Xen

2019-05-21 Thread Kamil Paral
On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 7:45 PM Lars Kurth wrote: > @Adam and Fedora Testing & QA: > any views on my proposal? > Regards > Lars > Hi Lars, thanks for your reply. Adam was on a long vacation and he's probably the most qualified person to reply to you, sorry for not telling you sooner. Adam is

[Xen-devel] [xen-4.11-testing test] 136516: tolerable FAIL - PUSHED

2019-05-21 Thread osstest service owner
flight 136516 xen-4.11-testing real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/136516/ Failures :-/ but no regressions. Tests which did not succeed, but are not blocking: test-amd64-amd64-xl-qcow217 guest-localmigrate/x10 fail blocked in 135683

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH MM-PART2 RESEND v2 16/19] xen/arm: mm: Protect Xen page-table update with a spinlock

2019-05-21 Thread Andrii Anisov
On 14.05.19 15:24, Julien Grall wrote: The function create_xen_entries() may be called concurrently. For instance, while the vmap allocation is protected by a spinlock, the mapping is not. The implementation create_xen_entries() contains quite a few TOCTOU races such as when allocating the

[Xen-devel] [PATCH L1TF MDS GT v1 1/3] common/grant_table: harden helpers

2019-05-21 Thread Norbert Manthey
Guests can issue grant table operations and provide guest controlled data to them. This data is used for memory loads in helper functions and macros. To avoid speculative out-of-bound accesses, we use the array_index_nospec macro where applicable, or the block_speculation macro. This is part of

[Xen-devel] L1TF MDS GT v1

2019-05-21 Thread Norbert Manthey
Dear all, This patch series attempts to mitigate the issue that have been raised in the XSA-289 (https://xenbits.xen.org/xsa/advisory-289.html). To block speculative execution on Intel hardware, an lfence instruction is required to make sure that selected checks are not bypassed. Speculative

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH MM-PART2 RESEND v2 05/19] xen/arm: Remove parameter cpuid from start_xen

2019-05-21 Thread Andrii Anisov
On 14.05.19 15:24, Julien Grall wrote: The parameter cpuid is not used by start_xen. So remove it. Signed-off-by: Julien Grall --- - Re-order the patch with "xen/arm: Rework secondary_start prototype" --- Reviewed-by: Andrii Anisov -- Sincerely, Andrii Anisov.

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH MM-PART2 RESEND v2 01/19] xen/const: Extend the existing macro BIT to take a suffix in parameter

2019-05-21 Thread Andrii Anisov
On 21.05.19 00:43, Stefano Stabellini wrote: On Tue, 14 May 2019, Julien Grall wrote: Arm currently provides two macro BIT and BIT_ULL that are only usable in C and return respectively unsigned long and unsigned long long. Extending the macros to deal with assembly would be a nice benefits

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH MM-PART2 RESEND v2 03/19] xen/arm: processor: Use BIT(.., UL) instead of _AC(1, U) in SCTLR_ defines

2019-05-21 Thread Andrii Anisov
On 14.05.19 15:24, Julien Grall wrote: Use the pattern BIT(..., UL) to make the code more readable. Note that unsigned long is used instead of unsigned because SCTLR is technically 32-bit on Arm32 and 64-bit on Arm64. Signed-off-by: Julien Grall Reviewed-by: Andrii Anisov -- Sincerely,

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH for-next] xen/arm: irq: Don't use _IRQ_PENDING when handling host interrupt

2019-05-21 Thread Julien Grall
Hi Stefano, On 5/20/19 10:04 PM, Stefano Stabellini wrote: On Mon, 20 May 2019, Julien Grall wrote: On 17/04/2019 18:27, Stefano Stabellini wrote: On Wed, 17 Apr 2019, Julien Grall wrote: Hi, On 17/04/2019 18:12, Stefano Stabellini wrote: On Tue, 16 Apr 2019, Julien Grall wrote: Hi

[Xen-devel] [PATCH L1TF MDS GT v1 3/3] common/grant_table: harden version dependent accesses

2019-05-21 Thread Norbert Manthey
Guests can issue grant table operations and provide guest controlled data to them. This data is used as index for memory loads after bound checks have been done. Depending on the grant table version, the size of elements in containers differ. As the base data structure is a page, the number of

[Xen-devel] [PATCH L1TF MDS GT v1 2/3] common/grant_table: harden bound accesses

2019-05-21 Thread Norbert Manthey
Guests can issue grant table operations and provide guest controlled data to them. This data is used as index for memory loads after bound checks have been done. To avoid speculative out-of-bound accesses, we use the array_index_nospec macro where applicable, or the macro block_speculation. Note,

[Xen-devel] [xen-unstable-smoke test] 136652: tolerable all pass - PUSHED

2019-05-21 Thread osstest service owner
flight 136652 xen-unstable-smoke real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/136652/ 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

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH L1TF v10 7/8] common/grant_table: block speculative out-of-bound accesses

2019-05-21 Thread Jan Beulich
>>> On 20.05.19 at 16:27, wrote: > On 3/29/19 18:11, Jan Beulich wrote: > On 14.03.19 at 13:50, wrote: >>> @@ -2410,9 +2448,11 @@ acquire_grant_for_copy( >>> PIN_FAIL(gt_unlock_out, GNTST_bad_gntref, >>> "Bad grant reference %#x\n", gref); >>> >>> -act =

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen/public: arch-arm: Restrict the visibility of struct vcpu_guest_core_regs

2019-05-21 Thread Jan Beulich
>>> On 21.05.19 at 11:35, wrote: > On 5/21/19 10:26 AM, Jan Beulich wrote: > On 20.05.19 at 20:12, wrote: >>> As this is now Xen and tools only, I am wondering whether the check on >>> GNU_C is still necessary. I am happy to send a follow-up patch (or fold >>> in this one) if

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen/public: arch-arm: Restrict the visibility of struct vcpu_guest_core_regs

2019-05-21 Thread Julien Grall
Hi Jan, On 5/21/19 10:43 AM, Jan Beulich wrote: On 21.05.19 at 11:35, wrote: On 5/21/19 10:26 AM, Jan Beulich wrote: On 20.05.19 at 20:12, wrote: As this is now Xen and tools only, I am wondering whether the check on GNU_C is still necessary. I am happy to send a follow-up

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH MM-PART2 RESEND v2 12/19] xen/arm32: head: Always zero r3 before update a page-table entry

2019-05-21 Thread Andrii Anisov
On 14.05.19 15:24, Julien Grall wrote: The boot code is using r2 and r3 to hold the page-table entry value. While r2 is always updated before storing the value, this is not always the case for r3. Thankfully today, r3 will always be zero when we care. But this is difficult to track and

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2] xen/drivers/char: Don't require vpl011 for all non-x86 archs

2019-05-21 Thread Jan Beulich
>>> On 20.05.19 at 19:20, wrote: >> --- a/xen/drivers/char/console.c >> +++ b/xen/drivers/char/console.c >> @@ -36,7 +36,7 @@ >> #ifdef CONFIG_X86 >> #include >> #include >> -#else >> +#elif CONFIG_SBSA_VUART_CONSOLE >> #include >> #endif > > This is a bit odds to require

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen/public: arch-arm: Restrict the visibility of struct vcpu_guest_core_regs

2019-05-21 Thread Julien Grall
Hi Jan, On 5/21/19 10:26 AM, Jan Beulich wrote: On 20.05.19 at 20:12, wrote: As this is now Xen and tools only, I am wondering whether the check on GNU_C is still necessary. I am happy to send a follow-up patch (or fold in this one) if it can be removed. I think this should

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen/arm64: livepatch: Fix build after 03957f58db

2019-05-21 Thread Andrew Cooper
On 21/05/2019 15:29, Julien Grall wrote: > Commit 03957f58db "xen/const: Extend the existing macro BIT to take a > suffix in parameter" didn't convert all the callers of the macro BIT. > > This will result to a build breakage when enabling Livepatch on arm64. > > Reported-by: Andrew Cooper >

Re: [Xen-devel] Unhandle NONE type device model broke QDISK backend

2019-05-21 Thread Wei Liu
On Tue, May 21, 2019 at 04:58:18PM +0200, Olaf Hering wrote: > Am Tue, 21 May 2019 15:43:15 +0100 > schrieb Wei Liu : > > > Yeah, that's indeed strange. Thanks for having a look. > > Is the used domU.cfg available? I think In my testing disk=[] had > backend=qdisk. See

[Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen/arm64: livepatch: Fix build after 03957f58db

2019-05-21 Thread Julien Grall
Commit 03957f58db "xen/const: Extend the existing macro BIT to take a suffix in parameter" didn't convert all the callers of the macro BIT. This will result to a build breakage when enabling Livepatch on arm64. Reported-by: Andrew Cooper Signed-off-by: Julien Grall ---

[Xen-devel] Unhandle NONE type device model broke QDISK backend

2019-05-21 Thread Wei Liu
Hi Olaf It appears there is at least one instance that's not properly handled. See http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/136440/test-amd64-amd64-xl-qcow2/10.ts-debian-di-install.log bxl: debug: libxl_device.c:380:libxl__device_disk_set_backend: Disk vdev=xvda spec.backend=qdisk

Re: [Xen-devel] Unhandle NONE type device model broke QDISK backend

2019-05-21 Thread Wei Liu
On Tue, May 21, 2019 at 04:41:22PM +0200, Olaf Hering wrote: > Am Tue, 21 May 2019 15:37:02 +0100 > schrieb Wei Liu : > > > bxl: debug: libxl_device.c:380:libxl__device_disk_set_backend: Disk > > vdev=xvda spec.backend=qdisk > > libxl: debug: libxl_linux.c:235:libxl__get_hotplug_script_info:

Re: [Xen-devel] Unhandle NONE type device model broke QDISK backend

2019-05-21 Thread Olaf Hering
On Tue, May 21, Wei Liu wrote: > bxl: debug: libxl_device.c:380:libxl__device_disk_set_backend: Disk vdev=xvda > spec.backend=qdisk > libxl: debug: libxl_linux.c:235:libxl__get_hotplug_script_info: Domain > 1:backend_kind 3, no need to execute scripts The backtrace looks like that: (gdb) bt #0

[Xen-devel] [xen-unstable-smoke test] 136687: regressions - FAIL

2019-05-21 Thread osstest service owner
flight 136687 xen-unstable-smoke real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/136687/ Regressions :-( Tests which did not succeed and are blocking, including tests which could not be run: build-arm64-xsm 6 xen-buildfail REGR. vs. 136665 Tests which

Re: [Xen-devel] [xen-4.10-testing test] 136552: regressions - FAIL

2019-05-21 Thread Jan Beulich
>>> On 21.05.19 at 15:56, wrote: > flight 136552 xen-4.10-testing real [real] > http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/136552/ > > Regressions :-( > > Tests which did not succeed and are blocking, > including tests which could not be run: > test-amd64-amd64-xl-pvhv2-intel 23

Re: [Xen-devel] Unhandle NONE type device model broke QDISK backend

2019-05-21 Thread Olaf Hering
Am Tue, 21 May 2019 15:43:15 +0100 schrieb Wei Liu : > Yeah, that's indeed strange. Thanks for having a look. Is the used domU.cfg available? I think In my testing disk=[] had backend=qdisk. Olaf pgpR3Q_4Qz3p3.pgp Description: Digitale Signatur von OpenPGP

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen/arm64: livepatch: Fix build after 03957f58db

2019-05-21 Thread Stefano Stabellini
On Tue, 21 May 2019, Julien Grall wrote: > Commit 03957f58db "xen/const: Extend the existing macro BIT to take a > suffix in parameter" didn't convert all the callers of the macro BIT. > > This will result to a build breakage when enabling Livepatch on arm64. > > Reported-by: Andrew Cooper >

Re: [Xen-devel] Unhandle NONE type device model broke QDISK backend

2019-05-21 Thread Olaf Hering
Am Tue, 21 May 2019 15:37:02 +0100 schrieb Wei Liu : > bxl: debug: libxl_device.c:380:libxl__device_disk_set_backend: Disk vdev=xvda > spec.backend=qdisk > libxl: debug: libxl_linux.c:235:libxl__get_hotplug_script_info: Domain > 1:backend_kind 3, no need to execute scripts I will check why

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen/arm64: livepatch: Fix build after 03957f58db

2019-05-21 Thread Julien Grall
On 5/21/19 4:36 PM, Stefano Stabellini wrote: On Tue, 21 May 2019, Julien Grall wrote: Commit 03957f58db "xen/const: Extend the existing macro BIT to take a suffix in parameter" didn't convert all the callers of the macro BIT. This will result to a build breakage when enabling Livepatch on

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v8 15/50] x86emul: support AVX512F move high/low insns

2019-05-21 Thread Andrew Cooper
On 15/03/2019 10:44, Jan Beulich wrote: > No explicit test harness additions other than the overrides, as the > compiler already makes use of the insns. > > Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich Acked-by: Andrew Cooper ___ Xen-devel mailing list

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 1/2] autotools: Updage config.guess and config.sub

2019-05-21 Thread Wei Liu
On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 06:12:49PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: > Alistair Francis writes ("[PATCH v2 1/2] autotools: Updage config.guess and > config.sub"): > > The autoconf manual [1] specifies that as we define AC_CANONICAL_HOST we > > must supply config.guess and config.sub. In which case let's

[Xen-devel] [xen-unstable-smoke test] 136665: tolerable all pass - PUSHED

2019-05-21 Thread osstest service owner
flight 136665 xen-unstable-smoke real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/136665/ 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

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v8 26/50] x86emul: support remaining AVX512BW legacy-equivalent insns

2019-05-21 Thread Andrew Cooper
On 15/03/2019 10:54, Jan Beulich wrote: > --- a/xen/arch/x86/x86_emulate/x86_emulate.c > +++ b/xen/arch/x86/x86_emulate/x86_emulate.c > @@ -435,7 +435,10 @@ static const struct ext0f38_table { > disp8scale_t d8s:4; > } ext0f38_table[256] = { > [0x00] = { .simd_size = simd_packed_int,

[Xen-devel] [xen-4.10-testing test] 136552: regressions - FAIL

2019-05-21 Thread osstest service owner
flight 136552 xen-4.10-testing real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/136552/ Regressions :-( Tests which did not succeed and are blocking, including tests which could not be run: test-amd64-amd64-xl-pvhv2-intel 23 leak-check/check fail REGR. vs. 135813

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v8 16/50] x86emul: support AVX512F move duplicate insns

2019-05-21 Thread Andrew Cooper
On 15/03/2019 10:45, Jan Beulich wrote: > Judging from insn prefixes, these are scalar insns, but their (memory) > operands are vector ones (with the exception of 128-bit VMOVDDUP). For > this some adjustments to disp8scale calculation code are needed. > > No explicit test harness additions other

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v8 26/50] x86emul: support remaining AVX512BW legacy-equivalent insns

2019-05-21 Thread Jan Beulich
>>> On 21.05.19 at 15:08, wrote: > On 15/03/2019 10:54, Jan Beulich wrote: >> --- a/xen/arch/x86/x86_emulate/x86_emulate.c >> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/x86_emulate/x86_emulate.c >> @@ -435,7 +435,10 @@ static const struct ext0f38_table { >> disp8scale_t d8s:4; >> } ext0f38_table[256] = { >>

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 1/2] autotools: Updage config.guess and config.sub

2019-05-21 Thread Wei Liu
On Fri, May 17, 2019 at 03:31:51PM -0700, Alistair Francis wrote: > The autoconf manual [1] specifies that as we define AC_CANONICAL_HOST we > must supply config.guess and config.sub. In which case let's update them > from [2] commit: b98424c24 "config.guess: Remove space after "#endif", as >

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v8 18/50] x86emul: support AVX512BW pack insns

2019-05-21 Thread Andrew Cooper
On 15/03/2019 10:46, Jan Beulich wrote: > No further test harness additions - what is there is good enough for > these rather "regular" insns. > > Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich Acked-by: Andrew Cooper ___ Xen-devel mailing list

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v8 19/50] x86emul: support AVX512F floating-point conversion insns

2019-05-21 Thread Andrew Cooper
On 15/03/2019 10:47, Jan Beulich wrote: > @@ -9312,7 +9386,8 @@ x86_emulate( > > if ( ea.type == OP_MEM ) > { > -rc = ops->write(ea.mem.seg, ea.mem.off, mmvalp, 8 << vex.l, > ctxt); > +rc = ops->write(ea.mem.seg, truncate_ea(ea.mem.off + first_byte), >

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v8 23/50] x86emul: support AVX512{F, DQ} uint-to-FP conversion insns

2019-05-21 Thread Andrew Cooper
On 15/03/2019 10:53, Jan Beulich wrote: > Some "manual" overrides of disp8scale are needed here again. In > particular code ends up simpler when using d8s_dq64 in the > twobyte_table[] entry. > > Test harness additions will be done once the reverse conversions are > also available. > >

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v8 25/50] x86emul: support remaining AVX512F legacy-equivalent insns

2019-05-21 Thread Andrew Cooper
On 15/03/2019 10:54, Jan Beulich wrote: > Plus their AVX512BW counterparts. > > Take the opportunity and also eliminate a pair of open coded instances > of scalar_1op(). > > Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich Acked-by: Andrew Cooper ___ Xen-devel mailing

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v8 17/50] x86emul: support AVX512{F, BW, _VBMI} permute insns

2019-05-21 Thread Andrew Cooper
On 15/03/2019 10:46, Jan Beulich wrote: > Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich Acked-by: Andrew Cooper ___ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v8 20/50] x86emul: support AVX512F legacy-equivalent packed int/FP conversion insns

2019-05-21 Thread Andrew Cooper
On 15/03/2019 10:47, Jan Beulich wrote: > ... including the two AVX512DQ forms which shared encodings, just with > EVEX.W set there. > > VCVTDQ2PD, sharing its main opcode with others, needs a "manual" > override of disp8scale. > > The simd_size changes for the twobyte_table[] entries are benign

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v8 21/50] x86emul: support AVX512F legacy-equivalent scalar int/FP conversion insns

2019-05-21 Thread Andrew Cooper
On 15/03/2019 10:52, Jan Beulich wrote: > VCVT{,T}S{S,D}2SI use EVEX.W for their destination (register) rather > than their (possibly memory) source operand size and hence need a > "manual" override of disp8scale. > > While the SDM claims that EVEX.L'L needs to be zero for the 32-bit forms > of

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v8 22/50] x86emul: support AVX512DQ packed quad-int/FP conversion insns

2019-05-21 Thread Andrew Cooper
On 15/03/2019 10:52, Jan Beulich wrote: > VCVT{,T}PS2QQ, sharing their main opcodes with others, once again need > "manual" overrides of disp8scale. > > While not directly related here, also add a scalar variant of to_wint() > to the test harness. > > Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich Acked-by: Andrew

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v8 24/50] x86emul: support AVX512{F, DQ} FP-to-uint conversion insns

2019-05-21 Thread Andrew Cooper
On 15/03/2019 10:54, Jan Beulich wrote: > Along the lines of prior patches, VCVT{,T}PS2UQQ as well as > VCVT{,T}S{S,D}2USI need "manual" overrides of disp8scale. > > The twobyte_table[] entries get altered, with their prior values > now put in place in x86_decode_twobyte(). > > Signed-off-by: Jan

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v8 19/50] x86emul: support AVX512F floating-point conversion insns

2019-05-21 Thread Jan Beulich
>>> On 21.05.19 at 13:33, wrote: > On 15/03/2019 10:47, Jan Beulich wrote: >> @@ -9312,7 +9386,8 @@ x86_emulate( >> >> if ( ea.type == OP_MEM ) >> { >> -rc = ops->write(ea.mem.seg, ea.mem.off, mmvalp, 8 << vex.l, >> ctxt); >> +rc =

Re: [Xen-devel] [qemu-upstream-4.11-testing test] 136184: regressions - FAIL

2019-05-21 Thread Julien Grall
Hi, Answering to myself. On 5/17/19 8:00 PM, Julien Grall wrote: Hi, On 5/17/19 6:23 PM, Anthony PERARD wrote: On Thu, May 16, 2019 at 10:38:54PM +0100, Julien Grall wrote: Hi Anthony, Thank you for CCing me. On 5/16/19 11:37 AM, Anthony PERARD wrote: On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 07:48:17PM

Re: [Xen-devel] [xen-4.11-testing test] 136385: regressions - FAIL

2019-05-21 Thread Julien Grall
Hi Ian, On 5/20/19 5:04 PM, Ian Jackson wrote: Julien Grall writes ("Re: [xen-4.11-testing test] 136385: regressions - FAIL"): Before the last 2 flights, the kernel was compiled natively. Now it is cross-compiled on x86 machine. So there are a difference in the way the kernel is built. That

[Xen-devel] [PATCH V1 1/2] xen/device-tree: Add dt_count_phandle_with_args helper

2019-05-21 Thread Oleksandr Tyshchenko
From: Oleksandr Tyshchenko Port Linux helper of_count_phandle_with_args for counting number of phandles in a property. Please note, this helper is ported from Linux v4.6. Signed-off-by: Oleksandr Tyshchenko --- Changes RFC -> V1: - Add Linux version which is used as the base. ---

[Xen-devel] [PATCH V1 0/2] Add ability to handle nodes with interrupts-extended property

2019-05-21 Thread Oleksandr Tyshchenko
From: Oleksandr Tyshchenko Hello, all. The purpose of this small series is to add minimal required support for Xen to be able to handle device-tree nodes with "interrupts-extended" property [1]. The "interrupts-extended" property is a special form for use when a node needs to reference

[Xen-devel] [PATCH V1 2/2] xen/device-tree: Add ability to handle nodes with interrupts-extended prop

2019-05-21 Thread Oleksandr Tyshchenko
From: Oleksandr Tyshchenko The "interrupts-extended" property is a special form for use when a node needs to reference multiple interrupt parents. According to the: Linux/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/interrupt-controller/interrupts.txt But, there are cases when "interrupts-extended"

[Xen-devel] [xen-unstable-smoke test] 136699: tolerable all pass - PUSHED

2019-05-21 Thread osstest service owner
flight 136699 xen-unstable-smoke real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/136699/ 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] [xen-unstable-smoke bisection] complete build-arm64-xsm

2019-05-21 Thread osstest service owner
branch xen-unstable-smoke xenbranch xen-unstable-smoke job build-arm64-xsm testid xen-build Tree: qemuu git://xenbits.xen.org/qemu-xen.git Tree: xen git://xenbits.xen.org/xen.git *** Found and reproduced problem changeset *** Bug is in tree: xen git://xenbits.xen.org/xen.git Bug

Re: [Xen-devel] Criteria / validation proposal: drop Xen

2019-05-21 Thread Adam Williamson
On Mon, 2019-05-13 at 16:29 -0600, Lars Kurth wrote: > Hi all, > > I am going to step in here with my hat as Xen Project community > manager. We had a discussion about this issue as part of last week's > community call. I CC'ed a number of stake-holders, which probably > should have been on the

[Xen-devel] [PATCH v5 02/10] xen/arm: optee: add OP-TEE header files

2019-05-21 Thread Volodymyr Babchuk
This header files describes protocol between OP-TEE and OP-TEE client driver in Linux. They are needed for upcoming OP-TEE mediator, which is added in the next patch. Reason to add those headers in separate patch is to ease up review. Those files were taken from linux tree (drivers/tee/optee/) and

[Xen-devel] [PATCH v5 07/10] xen/arm: optee: add support for arbitrary shared memory

2019-05-21 Thread Volodymyr Babchuk
Shared memory is widely used by NW (Normal World) to communicate with TAs (Trusted Applications) in OP-TEE. NW can share part of own memory with TA or with OP-TEE core, by registering it in OP-TEE, or by providing a temporal reference. Anyways, information about such memory buffers are sent to

[Xen-devel] [PATCH v5 04/10] xen/arm: optee: add fast calls handling

2019-05-21 Thread Volodymyr Babchuk
This patch adds handling for the fast SMCs. As name suggests, those calls can't be preempted and are used for auxiliary tasks such as information retrieval. Most handlers are quite trivial, with exception for capabilities information. Capabilities exchange should be filtered out, so only caps

[Xen-devel] [PATCH v5 06/10] xen/arm: optee: add support for RPC SHM buffers

2019-05-21 Thread Volodymyr Babchuk
OP-TEE usually uses the same idea with command buffers (see previous commit) to issue RPC requests. Problem is that initially it has no buffer, where it can write request. So the first RPC request it makes is special: it requests NW to allocate shared buffer for other RPC requests. Usually this

[Xen-devel] [PATCH v5 08/10] xen/arm: optee: add support for RPC commands

2019-05-21 Thread Volodymyr Babchuk
OP-TEE can issue multiple RPC requests. We are interested mostly in request that asks NW to allocate/free shared memory for OP-TEE needs, because mediator needs to do address translation in the same way as it was done for shared buffers registered by NW. OP-TEE can ask NW to allocate multiple

[Xen-devel] [PATCH v5 10/10] tools/arm: optee: create optee firmware node in DT if tee=optee

2019-05-21 Thread Volodymyr Babchuk
If TEE support is enabled with "tee=optee" option in xl.cfg, then we need to inform guest about available TEE, by creating corresponding node in the guest's device tree. Signed-off-by: Volodymyr Babchuk Reviewed-by: Julien Grall --- This patch depends on patches to optee.c. Changes from v4:

[Xen-devel] [PATCH v5 03/10] xen/arm: optee: add OP-TEE mediator skeleton

2019-05-21 Thread Volodymyr Babchuk
Add very basic OP-TEE mediator. It can probe for OP-TEE presence, tell it about domain creation/destruction and then return an error to all calls to the guest. This code issues two non-preemptible calls to OP-TEE: to create and to destroy client context. They can't block in OP-TEE, as they are

[Xen-devel] [PATCH v5 00/10] TEE mediator (and OP-TEE) support in XEN

2019-05-21 Thread Volodymyr Babchuk
Hello community, This is the fifth version of OP-TEE mediator in XEN. OP-TEE 3.5.0 was released when I worked on this version of the pathes. This is the first release where virtualization support is available. This release includes both original virtualization patches and new SMC that retrevies

[Xen-devel] [PATCH v5 05/10] xen/arm: optee: add std call handling

2019-05-21 Thread Volodymyr Babchuk
The main way to communicate with OP-TEE is to issue standard SMCCC call. "Standard" is a SMCCC term and it means that call can be interrupted and OP-TEE can return control to NW before completing the call. In contrast with fast calls, where arguments and return values are passed in registers,

[Xen-devel] [PATCH v5 01/10] xen/arm: add generic TEE mediator framework

2019-05-21 Thread Volodymyr Babchuk
This patch adds basic framework for TEE mediators. Guests can't talk to TEE directly, we need some entity that will intercept request and decide what to do with them. "TEE mediator" is a such entity. This is how it works: user can build XEN with multiple TEE mediators (see the next patches, where

[Xen-devel] [PATCH v5 09/10] tools/arm: tee: add "tee" option for xl.cfg

2019-05-21 Thread Volodymyr Babchuk
This enumeration controls TEE type for a domain. Currently there is two possible options: either 'none' or 'optee'. 'none' is the default value and it basically disables TEE support at all. 'native' enables access to a "real" OP-TEE installed on a platform. It is possible to add another types

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen/public: arch-arm: Restrict the visibility of struct vcpu_guest_core_regs

2019-05-21 Thread Stefano Stabellini
On Tue, 21 May 2019, Julien Grall wrote: > Hi Jan, > > On 5/21/19 10:43 AM, Jan Beulich wrote: > > > > > On 21.05.19 at 11:35, wrote: > > > On 5/21/19 10:26 AM, Jan Beulich wrote: > > > > > > > On 20.05.19 at 20:12, wrote: > > > > > As this is now Xen and tools only, I am wondering

[Xen-devel] [PATCH v3] xen/drivers/char: Protect the asm/vpl011.h include

2019-05-21 Thread Alistair Francis
The only use of asm/vpl011.h is protected by the CONFIG_SBSA_VUART_CONSOLE define so lets protect the include as well. Signed-off-by: Alistair Francis --- v3: - Rework commit title and message - Split it into a seperate ifdef xen/drivers/char/console.c | 3 ++- 1 file changed, 2

[Xen-devel] [linux-3.18 test] 136559: regressions - FAIL

2019-05-21 Thread osstest service owner
flight 136559 linux-3.18 real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/136559/ Regressions :-( Tests which did not succeed and are blocking, including tests which could not be run: test-amd64-amd64-xl-credit2 7 xen-boot fail REGR. vs. 128858