Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] x86/boot: fix MB2 header to require EFI BS

On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 10:40:26PM +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote: > On 24/10/2017 22:11, Daniel Kiper wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 09:22:20PM +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote: > >> On 24/10/17 21:08, Daniel Kiper wrote: > >>> On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 02:40:41

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] x86/boot: fix MB2 header to require EFI BS

On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 03:49:10PM -0500, Doug Goldstein wrote: > On 10/24/17 3:22 PM, Andrew Cooper wrote: > > On 24/10/17 21:08, Daniel Kiper wrote: > >> On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 02:40:41PM -0500, Doug Goldstein wrote: > >>> The EFI multiboot2 entry point curre

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] x86/boot: fix MB2 header to require EFI BS

On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 03:28:52PM -0500, Doug Goldstein wrote: > On 10/24/17 3:08 PM, Daniel Kiper wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 02:40:41PM -0500, Doug Goldstein wrote: > >> The EFI multiboot2 entry point currently requires EFI BootServices to > >> not have bee

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] x86/boot: fix MB2 header to require EFI BS

On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 09:22:20PM +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote: > On 24/10/17 21:08, Daniel Kiper wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 02:40:41PM -0500, Doug Goldstein wrote: > >> The EFI multiboot2 entry point currently requires EFI BootServices to > >> not have bee

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] x86/boot: fix MB2 header to require EFI BS

On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 02:40:41PM -0500, Doug Goldstein wrote: > The EFI multiboot2 entry point currently requires EFI BootServices to > not have been exited however the header currently tells the boot > loader that Xen optionally supports EFI BootServices having been exited. > With this change

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 2/2] x86/boot: rename send_chr to print_err

rr so that its closer in name to what it does. > > Reviewed-by: Doug Goldstein <car...@cardoe.com> Ditto. > Signed-off-by: David Esler <drumandst...@gmail.com> Anyway, Reviewed-by: Daniel Kiper <daniel.ki...@oracle.com> Daniel

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 1/2] x86/boot: fix early error display

by: David Esler <drumandst...@gmail.com> In general Reviewed-by: Daniel Kiper <daniel.ki...@oracle.com> Though please take into account Jan's request WRT to commit message. Or I am OK with Jan's changes before committing. Daniel ___ Xen-deve

Re: [Xen-devel] [Xen-users] UEFI Secure Boot Xen 4.9

On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 05:03:13PM +, Bill Jacobs (billjac) wrote: > Hi > What is the status of creating a shim to abstract secure boot > signing for Xen (to leverage MSFT 3rd party, e.g)? xen.efi works with shim itself out of the box. If you wish to use shim and GRUB2 to load Xen you have to

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 2/2] x86/boot: rename send_chr to print_err

just send it over the serial UART anymore so rename > > it to print_err so that its closer in name to what it does. > > > > Reviewed-by: Doug Goldstein <car...@cardoe.com> > > Signed-off-by: David Esler <drumandst...@gmail.com> > > Reviewed-by: Andrew Cooper <

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/2] x86/boot: fix early error display

On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 03:50:06PM -0500, Doug Goldstein wrote: > From: David Esler > > In 9180f5365524 a change was made to the send_chr function to take in > C-strings and print out a character at a time until a NULL was > encountered. However there is no code to

Re: [Xen-devel] Booting signed xen.efi through shim

On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 02:25:46AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote: > >>> On 22.09.17 at 00:46, wrote: > > One piece that I see still missing is the Xen command line parameters > > not being verified. It would be ideal to have the option to get that > > set during compile time as

Re: [Xen-devel] Booting signed xen.efi through shim

On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 09:59:51AM -0600, Tamas K Lengyel wrote: > On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 9:46 AM, Jan Beulich wrote: > On 20.09.17 at 17:20, wrote: > >> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 12:30 AM, Jan Beulich wrote: > >> On 20.09.17 at

Re: [Xen-devel] [Xen-users] UEFI Secure Boot Xen 4.9

On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 11:24:15AM -0400, Tamas K Lengyel wrote: > On Tue, Sep 5, 2017 at 12:26 PM, Tamas K Lengyel > <tamas.k.leng...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Mon, Sep 4, 2017 at 6:40 AM, Daniel Kiper <daniel.ki...@oracle.com> > > wrote: > >> On Wed, Au

Re: [Xen-devel] Booting signed xen.efi through shim

Hi Tamas, On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 05:40:35PM -0600, Tamas K Lengyel wrote: > Hi all, > for the last couple weeks I've been poking around the options > available to get Xen booted on a Secureboot enabled box. My goal is to > extend the chain of trust to the dom0 kernel. According to >

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2] Fix ARM multiboot2 breaking Fedora.

On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 12:26:28PM +0200, Daniel Kiper wrote: > On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 04:40:51PM -0400, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: > > Since v1 > > [http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/grub-devel/2017-08/msg00073.html] > > - Fixed up patch with failing invocation, >

[Xen-devel] GRUB documentation updated

Hey, Some people asked me about Multiboot2 Specification and other GRUB doc stuff. So, I have put latest things at https://www.gnu.org/software/grub/grub-documentation.html I hope that helps. If you have any questions please drop me a line. Thanks, Daniel

Re: [Xen-devel] [Xen-users] UEFI Secure Boot Xen 4.9

On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 10:16:23AM -0600, Tamas K Lengyel wrote: > On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 2:01 PM, Daniel Kiper <daniel.ki...@oracle.com> wrote: > > Hey Tamas, > > > > Sorry for late reply. I was on vacation. > > > > On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 09:01:06PM -0

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2] Fix ARM multiboot2 breaking Fedora.

On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 04:40:51PM -0400, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: > Since v1 [http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/grub-devel/2017-08/msg00073.html] > - Fixed up patch with failing invocation, > - Redid patch #2 per Daniel's instructions. > > > Hey, > > The first patch: > [PATCH 1/2] Fix

Re: [Xen-devel] [Xen-users] UEFI Secure Boot Xen 4.9

Hey Tamas, Sorry for late reply. I was on vacation. On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 09:01:06PM -0600, Tamas K Lengyel wrote: > On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 5:04 AM, Daniel Kiper <daniel.ki...@oracle.com> wrote: [...] > > UEFI will verify shim secure boot signature then shim will verify GRUB

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 2/2] Use grub-file to figure out whether multiboot2 should be used for Xen.gz

On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 02:40:15PM -0400, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: > The multiboot2 is much more preferable than multiboot. Especiall > if booting under EFI where multiboot does not have the functionality > to pass ImageHandler. > > Signed-off-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/2] Fix util/grub.d/20_linux_xen.in: Add xen_boot command support for aarch64

On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 02:42:18PM -0400, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: > On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 02:40:14PM -0400, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: > > Commit d33045ce7ffcb7c1e4a60c14d5ca64b36e3c5abe introduced > > the support for this, but it does not work under x86 (as it stops > > 20_linux_xen from

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 4.12 26/84] x86/xen/efi: Initialize only the EFI struct members used by Xen

On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 11:16:39AM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 10:39:10AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > * Daniel Kiper <daniel.ki...@oracle.com> wrote: > > > > > Hey Greg, > > > > > > On Wed, Jul

Re: [Xen-devel] Xen 4.10 Development Update

== > > * Per-cpu tasklet > - XEN-28 > - Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk > > * Add support of rcu_idle_{enter,exit} > - XEN-27 > - Dario Faggioli > > === x86 === Could you add the following project to the list? * Change xen.efi build and add SHIM_LOCK verific

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 4.12 26/84] x86/xen/efi: Initialize only the EFI struct members used by Xen

On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 01:19:58PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 01:12:14PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 12:37:47PM +0200, Daniel Kiper wrote: > > > Hey Greg, > > > > > > On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 11:43:

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 4.12 26/84] x86/xen/efi: Initialize only the EFI struct members used by Xen

On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 01:12:14PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 12:37:47PM +0200, Daniel Kiper wrote: > > Hey Greg, > > > > On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 11:43:32AM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > > 4.12-stable review patch. If anyone has

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 4.12 26/84] x86/xen/efi: Initialize only the EFI struct members used by Xen

Hey Greg, On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 11:43:32AM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > 4.12-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know. Why did you skip this patch for 4.11? IMO it should be applied there too. Daniel ___

[Xen-devel] [GRUB2 PATCH RFC 1/1] efi: Add EFI shim lock verifier

This is based on git://git.savannah.gnu.org/grub.git phcoder/verifiers branch. Just an RFC. TODO: - disable the GRUB2 modules load/unload, - disable the dangerous modules, e.g. iorw, memrw. Signed-off-by: Daniel Kiper <daniel.ki...@oracle.com> --- grub-core/Makefile.core.def

[Xen-devel] [PATCH RFC 6/7] xen/x86/efi: Verify dom0 kernel with SHIM_LOCK protocol in efi_multiboot2()

Signed-off-by: Daniel Kiper <daniel.ki...@oracle.com> --- xen/arch/x86/boot/head.S| 20 ++-- xen/arch/x86/efi/efi-boot.h | 12 +++- xen/arch/x86/efi/stub.c |5 - 3 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/boot/he

[Xen-devel] [PATCH RFC 7/7] xen/x86: Build xen.mb.efi directly from xen-syms

Signed-off-by: Daniel Kiper <daniel.ki...@oracle.com> --- xen/arch/x86/Makefile |1 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/Makefile b/xen/arch/x86/Makefile index 93ead6e..e09f5f4 100644 --- a/xen/arch/x86/Makefile +++ b/xen/arch/x86/Makefile @@ -95,6 +95,7 @@ sym

[Xen-devel] [PATCH RFC 4/7] xen/x86: Add some addresses to the Multiboot2 header

MULTIBOOT2_HEADER_TAG_ENTRY_ADDRESS and MULTIBOOT2_HEADER_TAG_ENTRY_ADDRESS_EFI64 tags close to each other. Signed-off-by: Daniel Kiper <daniel.ki...@oracle.com> --- xen/arch/x86/boot/head.S | 19 +++ 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/boot/head.S b/xen/arch/x8

[Xen-devel] [PATCH RFC 0/7] Change xen.efi build and add SHIM_LOCK verification into efi_multiboot2()

/include/xen/compile.h.in |1 + 9 files changed, 245 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-) Daniel Kiper (7): xen: Introduce XEN_COMPILE_POSIX_TIME xen/x86: Manually build PE header xen/x86: Add some addresses to the Multiboot header xen/x86: Add some addresses to the Multiboot2

[Xen-devel] [PATCH RFC 5/7] efi: split out efi_shim_lock()

..which verifies PE signatures with SHIM_LOCK protocol. We want to re-use this code in subsequent patch in efi_multiboot2(). Signed-off-by: Daniel Kiper <daniel.ki...@oracle.com> --- xen/common/efi/boot.c | 19 +-- 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) diff

[Xen-devel] [PATCH RFC 2/7] xen/x86: Manually build PE header

by crash tool, - simpler code, - simpler build, - Xen build will no longer depend on ld i386pep support. Signed-off-by: Daniel Kiper <daniel.ki...@oracle.com> --- xen/arch/x86/Rules.mk|2 + xen/arch/x86/boot/head.S | 145 ++ xen/ar

[Xen-devel] [PATCH RFC 3/7] xen/x86: Add some addresses to the Multiboot header

In comparison to ELF the PE format is not supported by the Multiboot protocol. So, if we wish to load xen.efi using this protocol we have to put header_addr, load_addr, load_end_addr, bss_end_addr and entry_addr data into Multiboot header. Signed-off-by: Daniel Kiper <daniel.ki...@oracle.

[Xen-devel] [PATCH RFC 1/7] xen: Introduce XEN_COMPILE_POSIX_TIME

We need the POSIX time to properly fill the TimeDateStamp field in the PE header. Signed-off-by: Daniel Kiper <daniel.ki...@oracle.com> --- xen/Makefile | 14 -- xen/include/xen/compile.h.in |1 + 2 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) diff

Re: [Xen-devel] Optimising the DevSummit schedule on July 11

On Tue, Jul 04, 2017 at 09:01:27AM +0100, Roger Pau Monne wrote: > On Mon, Jul 03, 2017 at 11:37:29AM +0100, Lars Kurth wrote: > > Folks, (committers and speakers/moderators CC'ed) > > > > I have a few extra sessions from Jan which came in today. Most of Tuesday > > in x86 stuff, so there is no

Re: [Xen-devel] OOPS new Xen 4.9.0_08 / kernel 4.12.0 Dom0 crash @ domain_crash_sync called from entry.S: fault at ffff82d080342328 entry.o#create_bounce_frame+0x135/0x14d

On Wed, Jul 05, 2017 at 10:27:19AM -0700, PGNet Dev wrote: > On 7/5/17 12:58 AM, Jan Beulich wrote: > >So there are two problems here: One is the fact that the kernel > >really should put an Invalid Opcode exception handler in place > >before intentionally raising any such exceptions (which WARN()

Re: [Xen-devel] Optimising the DevSummit schedule on July 11

On Mon, Jul 03, 2017 at 11:37:29AM +0100, Lars Kurth wrote: > Folks, (committers and speakers/moderators CC'ed) > > I have a few extra sessions from Jan which came in today. Most of Tuesday > in x86 stuff, so there is no space. I merged one of my session with a proposal > from Jan, but it seems to

[Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 0/2] xen/efi: Fixes

- drivers/firmware/efi/efi.c |3 ++- 2 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) Daniel Kiper (2): efi: Process MEMATTR table only if EFI_MEMMAP x86/xen/efi: Init only efi struct members used by Xen ___ Xen-devel

[Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 1/2] efi: Process MEMATTR table only if EFI_MEMMAP

Otherwise e.g. Xen dom0 on x86_64 EFI platforms crashes. In theory we can check EFI_PARAVIRT too, however, EFI_MEMMAP looks more generic and covers more cases. Signed-off-by: Daniel Kiper <daniel.ki...@oracle.com> Reviewed-by: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheu...@linaro.org> --- drivers/

[Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 2/2] x86/xen/efi: Init only efi struct members used by Xen

used by Xen to avoid such issues in the future. Signed-off-by: Daniel Kiper <daniel.ki...@oracle.com> Acked-by: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheu...@linaro.org> -- Align assignments to increase readability. Suggested by Ingo Molnar. --- arch/x86/xen/

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 2/2] x86/xen/efi: Init only efi struct members used by Xen

On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 11:24:06AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Daniel Kiper <daniel.ki...@oracle.com> wrote: > > > -static const struct efi efi_xen __initconst = { > > - .systab = NULL, /* Initialized later. */ > > - .runtime_version

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 2/2] x86/xen/efi: Init only efi struct members used by Xen

On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 09:10:51AM +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote: > On 20/06/2017 21:14, Daniel Kiper wrote: > > Current approach, wholesale efi struct initialization from efi_xen, is not > > good. Usually if new member is defined then it is properly initialized in > > drive

[Xen-devel] [PATCH 2/2] x86/xen/efi: Init only efi struct members used by Xen

used by Xen to avoid such issues in the future. Signed-off-by: Daniel Kiper <daniel.ki...@oracle.com> --- arch/x86/xen/efi.c | 45 - 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 33 deletions(-) diff --git a/arch/x86/xen/efi.c b/arch/x86/xen/efi.c index 3

[Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/2] efi: Process MEMATTR table only if EFI_MEMMAP

Otherwise e.g. Xen dom0 on x86_64 EFI platforms crashes. In theory we can check EFI_PARAVIRT too, however, EFI_MEMMAP looks more generic and covers more cases. Signed-off-by: Daniel Kiper <daniel.ki...@oracle.com> --- drivers/firmware/efi/efi.c |3 ++- 1 file changed, 2 insertions

[Xen-devel] [PATCH 0/2] xen/efi: Fixes

insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) Daniel Kiper (2): efi: Process MEMATTR table only if EFI_MEMMAP x86/xen/efi: Init only efi struct members used by Xen ___ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2] x86/boot: Fix the boot time relocation calculations

her than limiting to an arbitrary 1k. One side effect is that the > MB2/EFI path continues to use the EFI stack until the trampoline is entered. > > Signed-off-by: Andrew Cooper <andrew.coop...@citrix.com> > Tested-by: Sergey Dyasli <sergey.dya...@citrix.com> Reviewed-by: Dan

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH for-4.9] x86/boot: Fix the boot time relocation calculations

per <andrew.coop...@citrix.com> > Tested-by: Sergey Dyasli <sergey.dya...@citrix.com> > --- > CC: Jan Beulich <jbeul...@suse.com> > CC: Julien Grall <julien.gr...@arm.com> > CC: Daniel Kiper <daniel.ki...@oracle.com> > CC: Doug Goldstein <car...@cardoe

Re: [Xen-devel] [Crash-utility] [PATCH] xen: Add support for domU with Linux kernel 3.19 and newer

translated again. > > * Endless loop starts from here. > > */ > > xen_m2p(machine=0x581b7e000) > > __xen_m2p(machine=0x581b7e000, mfn=0x581b7e) > > readmem(addr=0xc91f5000) > > > > Fortunately, PV domU p2m mapping is also stored at xd->xfd + > > xc

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v8 0/3] arm64, xen: add xen_boot support into grub-mkconfig

On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 03:46:55PM +0200, Daniel Kiper wrote: > Hi Julien, > > On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 02:43:28PM +0100, Julien Grall wrote: > > Hi Daniel, > > > > On 15/05/17 14:38, Daniel Kiper wrote: > > >On Sun, May 14, 2017 at 03:43:44PM +0800, fu@lina

Re: [Xen-devel] [Xen-users] UEFI Secure Boot Xen 4.9

On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 07:09:54PM +, Bill Jacobs (billjac) wrote: > > -Original Message- > > From: Daniel Kiper [mailto:daniel.ki...@oracle.com] > > Sent: Monday, May 15, 2017 6:13 AM > > To: Bill Jacobs (billjac) <bill...@cisco.com>; george.dun..

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v8 0/3] arm64, xen: add xen_boot support into grub-mkconfig

Hi Julien, On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 02:43:28PM +0100, Julien Grall wrote: > Hi Daniel, > > On 15/05/17 14:38, Daniel Kiper wrote: > >On Sun, May 14, 2017 at 03:43:44PM +0800, fu@linaro.org wrote: > >>From: Fu Wei <fu@linaro.org> > >> > >

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v8 0/3] arm64, xen: add xen_boot support into grub-mkconfig

On Sun, May 14, 2017 at 03:43:44PM +0800, fu@linaro.org wrote: > From: Fu Wei > > This patchset add xen_boot support into grub-mkconfig for > generating xen boot entrances automatically > > Also update the docs/grub.texi for new xen_boot commands. LGTM, if there are no

Re: [Xen-devel] [Xen-users] UEFI Secure Boot Xen 4.9

Hey, CC-ing Xen-devel to spread some knowledge about the issue. On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 10:42:23AM +0100, George Dunlap wrote: > On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 11:36 PM, Bill Jacobs (billjac) > wrote: > > Hi all > > > > I gather that with 4.9, UEFI secure boot of Xen should be

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v7 0/3] arm64, xen: add xen_boot support into grup-mkconfig

Hey, On Tue, May 02, 2017 at 03:06:24PM +0800, fu@linaro.org wrote: > From: Fu Wei > > This patchset add xen_boot support into grup-mkconfig for > generating xen boot entrances automatically > > Also update the docs/grub.texi for new xen_boot commands. Slowly recovering

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 2/2] kexec: remove spinlock now that all KEXEC hypercall ops are protected at the top-level

ce of the spin_lock(). > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Eric DeVolder <eric.devol...@oracle.com> > >> Reviewed-by: Bhavesh Davda <bhavesh.da...@oracle.com> > >> Reviewed-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.w...@oracle.com> > > Reviewed-by: Jan

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v3 1/2] kexec: use hypercall_create_continuation to protect KEXEC ops

On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 03:34:21AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote: > >>> On 19.04.17 at 19:16, wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 10:19:44AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote: > >> >>> On 19.04.17 at 17:54, wrote: > >> > On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 10:47:15AM

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] arm64: xen: Implement EFI reset_system callback

On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 08:37:38PM +0100, Matt Fleming wrote: > On Wed, 19 Apr, at 09:29:06PM, Daniel Kiper wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 02:46:50PM +0100, Matt Fleming wrote: > > > On Thu, 06 Apr, at 04:55:11PM, Mark Rutland wrote: > > > > > > >

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] arm64: xen: Implement EFI reset_system callback

On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 02:46:50PM +0100, Matt Fleming wrote: > On Thu, 06 Apr, at 04:55:11PM, Mark Rutland wrote: > > > > Please, let's keep the Xen knowledge constrained to the Xen EFI wrapper, > > rather than spreading it further. > > > > IMO, given reset_system is a *mandatory* function, the

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v3 1/2] kexec: use hypercall_create_continuation to protect KEXEC ops

On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 10:19:44AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote: > >>> On 19.04.17 at 17:54, wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 10:47:15AM -0500, Eric DeVolder wrote: > >> @@ -1193,6 +1194,9 @@ static int do_kexec_op_internal(unsigned long op, > >> if ( ret ) > >>

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v3 2/2] kexec: remove spinlock now that all KEXEC hypercall ops are protected at the top-level

On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 10:47:16AM -0500, Eric DeVolder wrote: > The spinlock in kexec_swap_images() was removed as > this function is only reachable on the kexec hypercall, which is > now protected at the top-level in do_kexec_op_internal(), > thus the local spinlock is no longer necessary. > >

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v3 1/2] kexec: use hypercall_create_continuation to protect KEXEC ops

_PROGRESS > was introduced. > > While at it, fixed the #define mismatched spacing > > Signed-off-by: Eric DeVolder <eric.devol...@oracle.com> > Reviewed-by: Bhavesh Davda <bhavesh.da...@oracle.com> > Reviewed-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.w...@oracle.com

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 1/2] kexec: use hypercall_create_continuation to protect KEXEC ops

On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 12:48:56PM +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote: > On 19/04/17 12:00, Daniel Kiper wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 04:48:06AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote: > >>>>> On 17.04.17 at 21:09, <eric.devol...@oracle.com> wrote: > >>> --- a/xen/

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 2/2] kexec: remove spinlock now that all KEXEC hypercall ops are protected at the top-level

On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 05:20:50AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote: > >>> On 19.04.17 at 12:56, wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 04:49:48AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote: > >> >>> On 17.04.17 at 21:09, wrote: > >> > The spinlock in kexec_swap_images() was

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 1/2] kexec: use hypercall_create_continuation to protect KEXEC ops

sense for me. > clearly is subject to Andrew's opinion) > Reviewed-by: Jan Beulich <jbeul...@suse.com> Otherwise Reviewed-by: Daniel Kiper <daniel.ki...@oracle.com> Daniel ___ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 2/2] kexec: remove spinlock now that all KEXEC hypercall ops are protected at the top-level

On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 04:49:48AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote: > >>> On 17.04.17 at 21:09, wrote: > > The spinlock in kexec_swap_images() was removed as > > this function is only reachable on the kexec hypercall, which is > > now protected at the top-level in

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2] xen, kdump: handle pv domain in paddr_vmcoreinfo_note()

On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 06:53:36PM +0200, Petr Tesarik wrote: > On Tue, 11 Apr 2017 19:20:08 +0200 > Daniel Kiper <daniel.ki...@oracle.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 04:59:16PM +0200, Petr Tesarik wrote: > >[...] > > > Tested-by: Petr Tesarik <pte

Re: [Xen-devel] EFI + tboot + Xen

On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 04:17:54PM +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote: > On 14/04/2017 15:54, Daniel Kiper wrote: > > Hey, > > > > Has anybody tried to run EFI + tboot + Xen? > > I have a feeling that it does not work because > > tboot shuts down EFI boot servic

[Xen-devel] EFI + tboot + Xen

Hey, Has anybody tried to run EFI + tboot + Xen? I have a feeling that it does not work because tboot shuts down EFI boot services. However, even if it works then efibootmgr is unusable due to lack of EFI runtime services. Do we care? Is it possible to make it work with full blown EFI

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v16 7/9] x86: make Xen early boot code relocatable

On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 09:44:17PM -0400, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: > On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 04:11:25PM +0200, Daniel Kiper wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 07, 2017 at 05:23:33AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote: > > > >>> On 21.02.17 at 20:19, <daniel.ki...@oracle.com> wrote:

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v16 7/9] x86: make Xen early boot code relocatable

On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 02:43:22PM -0500, Doug Goldstein wrote: > On 4/13/17 9:11 AM, Daniel Kiper wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 07, 2017 at 05:23:33AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote: > >>>>> On 21.02.17 at 20:19, <daniel.ki...@oracle.com> wrote: > >>> Ev

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v16 7/9] x86: make Xen early boot code relocatable

2-bit mode, > > - %fs is used as base for Xen data relative addressing in 32-bit code > > if it is possible; %esi is used for that thing during error printing > > because it is not always possible to properly and efficiently > > initialize %fs. > > > >

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2] xen, kdump: handle pv domain in paddr_vmcoreinfo_note()

On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 04:59:16PM +0200, Petr Tesarik wrote: > On Tue, 11 Apr 2017 15:00:58 +0200 > Daniel Kiper <daniel.ki...@oracle.com> wrote: > > > On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 02:45:43PM +0200, Juergen Gross wrote: > > > On 03/04/17 14:42, Daniel Kiper wrote: > &g

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2] xen, kdump: handle pv domain in paddr_vmcoreinfo_note()

On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 02:45:43PM +0200, Juergen Gross wrote: > On 03/04/17 14:42, Daniel Kiper wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 12:14:38PM +0200, Juergen Gross wrote: > >> For kdump to work correctly it needs the physical address of > >> vmcoreinfo_note. When

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] kexec: Add spinlock for the whole hypercall

On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 06:31:36AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote: > >>> On 11.04.17 at 13:24, wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 01:46:37AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote: > >> >>> On 10.04.17 at 21:44, wrote: > >> wouldn't it be better to handle this with

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] kexec: Add spinlock for the whole hypercall

On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 01:46:37AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote: > >>> On 10.04.17 at 21:44, wrote: > > Please don't forget Cc-ing the maintainer(s) of the code being modified. > > > @@ -1187,12 +1182,22 @@ static int do_kexec_op_internal(unsigned long op, > >

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2] xen, kdump: handle pv domain in paddr_vmcoreinfo_note()

On Fri, Apr 07, 2017 at 11:16:22AM +0200, Petr Tesarik wrote: > On Wed, 5 Apr 2017 13:13:00 +0200 > Petr Tesarik <ptesa...@suse.com> wrote: > > > On Tue, 4 Apr 2017 12:42:53 -0700 (PDT) > > Daniel Kiper <daniel.ki...@oracle.com> wrote: > > > >[...] >

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] arm64: xen: Implement EFI reset_system callback

On Thu, Apr 06, 2017 at 06:22:44PM +0200, Juergen Gross wrote: > On 06/04/17 18:06, Daniel Kiper wrote: > > Hi Julien, > > > > On Thu, Apr 06, 2017 at 04:39:13PM +0100, Julien Grall wrote: > >> Hi Daniel, > >> > >> On 06/04/17 16:20, Daniel Kiper

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] arm64: xen: Implement EFI reset_system callback

Hi Julien, On Thu, Apr 06, 2017 at 04:39:13PM +0100, Julien Grall wrote: > Hi Daniel, > > On 06/04/17 16:20, Daniel Kiper wrote: > >On Thu, Apr 06, 2017 at 04:38:24PM +0200, Juergen Gross wrote: > >>On 06/04/17 16:27, Daniel Kiper wrote: > >>>On Thu, Apr 06, 20

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] arm64: xen: Implement EFI reset_system callback

On Thu, Apr 06, 2017 at 04:38:24PM +0200, Juergen Gross wrote: > On 06/04/17 16:27, Daniel Kiper wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 06, 2017 at 09:32:32AM +0100, Julien Grall wrote: > >> Hi Juergen, > >> > >> On 06/04/17 07:23, Juergen Gross wrote: > >>> On 05/

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] arm64: xen: Implement EFI reset_system callback

On Thu, Apr 06, 2017 at 09:32:32AM +0100, Julien Grall wrote: > Hi Juergen, > > On 06/04/17 07:23, Juergen Gross wrote: > >On 05/04/17 21:49, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: > >>On 04/05/2017 02:14 PM, Julien Grall wrote: > >>>The x86 code has theoritically a similar issue, altought EFI does not > >>>seem

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2] xen, kdump: handle pv domain in paddr_vmcoreinfo_note()

> On 03/04/17 14:42, Daniel Kiper wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 12:14:38PM +0200, Juergen Gross wrote: > >> For kdump to work correctly it needs the physical address of > >> vmcoreinfo_note. When running as dom0 this means the virtual address > >> has to

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] kexec: clear kexec_image slot when unloading kexec image

a case, leading to a stale pointer being left behind in the > kexec_image array and Xen panics in subsequent load/unload operations. > > Signed-off-by: Bhavesh Davda <bhavesh.da...@oracle.com> > Reviewed-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.w...@oracle.com> > Reviewed-by: Dan

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2] xen, kdump: handle pv domain in paddr_vmcoreinfo_note()

out any issue (at least basic commands like dmesg, bt, ps, etc.)? If yes for both you can add: Reviewed-by: Daniel Kiper <daniel.ki...@oracle.com> Daniel ___ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 0/3] xen: support of large memory maps

On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 02:10:20PM +0100, Juergen Gross wrote: > This patch series is the first part for adding support of large EFI > memory maps (> the current limit of 128 entries) while reducing > trampoline size. > > I'm not posting the final patch for making the trampoline size > reduction

Re: [Xen-devel] Supporting systems with large E820 maps

On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 01:01:44PM +0100, Juergen Gross wrote: > On 21/03/17 11:05, Jan Beulich wrote: > On 21.03.17 at 06:14, wrote: > >> On 20/03/17 20:03, Alex Thorlton wrote: > >>> Hey everyone, > >>> > >>> Recently, I've been working with Boris Ostrovsky to get Xen

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v16 4/9] x86: add multiboot2 protocol support for EFI platforms

On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 07:43:57AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote: > >>> On 16.03.17 at 14:35, wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 07:12:21AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote: > >> >>> On 16.03.17 at 13:12, wrote: > >> > Everything works. I am not able to

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v16 4/9] x86: add multiboot2 protocol support for EFI platforms

On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 07:12:21AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote: > >>> On 16.03.17 at 13:12, wrote: > > Everything works. I am not able to reproduce any issues reported by Doug. > > Andrew, Jan, Doug, are there still any objections to commit the rest of v16? > > Well, Andrew

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v16 4/9] x86: add multiboot2 protocol support for EFI platforms

On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 09:27:27AM -0500, Doug Goldstein wrote: > On 3/15/17 6:35 AM, Daniel Kiper wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 09, 2017 at 02:02:49PM -0600, Doug Goldstein wrote: > > > > [...] > > > >> Still missing 'xl info'. > > > > Got Intel NUC5i3

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v16 4/9] x86: add multiboot2 protocol support for EFI platforms

On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 09:42:53AM -0500, Doug Goldstein wrote: > On 3/15/17 9:38 AM, Daniel Kiper wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 09:27:27AM -0500, Doug Goldstein wrote: > >> On 3/15/17 6:35 AM, Daniel Kiper wrote: > >>> On Thu, Mar 09, 2017 at 02:02:49

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v16 4/9] x86: add multiboot2 protocol support for EFI platforms

On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 09:27:27AM -0500, Doug Goldstein wrote: > On 3/15/17 6:35 AM, Daniel Kiper wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 09, 2017 at 02:02:49PM -0600, Doug Goldstein wrote: > > > > [...] > > > >> Still missing 'xl info'. > > > > Got Intel NUC5i3

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v16 4/9] x86: add multiboot2 protocol support for EFI platforms

On Thu, Mar 09, 2017 at 02:02:49PM -0600, Doug Goldstein wrote: [...] > Still missing 'xl info'. Got Intel NUC5i3MYHE (internally it is NUC5i3MYBE board) into my hands. I have put 8 GiB RAM and 500 GB SATA 3 into it. Updated BIOS/EFI to 0041 version (it is the latest one). Installed latest

Re: [Xen-devel] [RFC PATCH] mm, hotplug: get rid of auto_online_blocks

Hey, On Mon, Mar 06, 2017 at 03:54:17PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: [...] > So let's discuss the current memory hotplug shortcomings and get rid of > the crud which developed on top. I will start by splitting up the patch > into 3 parts. Do the auto online thing from the HyperV and xen balloning

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v16 4/9] x86: add multiboot2 protocol support for EFI platforms

On Tue, Mar 07, 2017 at 12:39:04AM +0100, Daniel Kiper wrote: > On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 09:04:17AM -0800, Doug Goldstein wrote: > > [...] > > > I'm currently at ELC and then on vacation so I don't have access to any > > of the machines currently myself. However the ma

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v16 4/9] x86: add multiboot2 protocol support for EFI platforms

On Tue, Mar 07, 2017 at 10:44:15PM -0500, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: > On Tue, Mar 07, 2017 at 12:39:04AM +0100, Daniel Kiper wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 09:04:17AM -0800, Doug Goldstein wrote: > > > > [...] > > > > > I'm currently at ELC and then on va

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v16 4/9] x86: add multiboot2 protocol support for EFI platforms

On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 09:04:17AM -0800, Doug Goldstein wrote: [...] > I'm currently at ELC and then on vacation so I don't have access to any > of the machines currently myself. However the machine I most use to test > is a NUC5i5MYHE and a NUC5i3MYHE if you want to ask around if someone > has

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v16 5/9] x86: change default load address from 1 MiB to 2 MiB

On Wed, Mar 01, 2017 at 04:21:35AM -0700, Jan Beulich wrote: > >>> On 01.03.17 at 11:51, wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 01, 2017 at 03:34:47AM -0700, Jan Beulich wrote: > >> >>> On 01.03.17 at 11:13, wrote: > >> > On Wed, Mar 01, 2017 at 02:05:39AM

Re: [Xen-devel] [xen-unstable bisection] complete test-amd64-i386-xl-qemut-stubdom-debianhvm-amd64-xsm

On Thu, Mar 02, 2017 at 10:42:57AM +, Andrew Cooper wrote: > On 02/03/17 10:41, Daniel Kiper wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 01, 2017 at 11:53:52PM +, osstest service owner wrote: > >> branch xen-unstable > >> xenbranch xen-unstable > >> job test-amd64-i386-

Re: [Xen-devel] [xen-unstable bisection] complete test-amd64-i386-xl-qemut-stubdom-debianhvm-amd64-xsm

xenbits.xen.org/xen.git > Bug introduced: c5b9805bc1f79319ae342c65fcc201a15a47 > Bug not present: b199c44afa3a0d18d0e968e78a590eb9e69e20ad > Last fail repro: http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/106324/ > > > commit c5b9805bc1f79319ae342c65fcc201a15a47

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v16 5/9] x86: change default load address from 1 MiB to 2 MiB

On Wed, Mar 01, 2017 at 03:34:47AM -0700, Jan Beulich wrote: > >>> On 01.03.17 at 11:13, wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 01, 2017 at 02:05:39AM -0700, Jan Beulich wrote: > >> >>> On 21.02.17 at 20:19, wrote: > >> > Subsequent patches introducing

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   >