Re: [RFC 00/18] Pkernfs: Support persistence for live update

2024-02-05 Thread Alex Williamson
On Mon, 5 Feb 2024 12:01:45 + James Gowans wrote: > This RFC is to solicit feedback on the approach of implementing support for > live > update via an in-memory filesystem responsible for storing all live update > state > as files in the filesystem. > > Hypervisor live update is a mechanis

Re: [PATCH 0/6] Crashdump Accepting Active IOMMU

2013-12-03 Thread Alex Williamson
On Tue, 2013-12-03 at 12:41 -0700, Bill Sumner wrote: > The following series implements a fix for: > A kdump problem about DMA that has been discussed for a long time. That is, > when a kernel panics and boots into the kdump kernel, DMA started by the > panicked kernel is not stopped before the kd

Re: [PATCH] Reset PCIe devices to stop ongoing DMA

2013-05-07 Thread Alex Williamson
On Tue, 2013-05-07 at 16:10 -0400, Don Dutile wrote: > On 05/07/2013 12:39 PM, Alex Williamson wrote: > > On Wed, 2013-04-24 at 13:58 +0900, Takao Indoh wrote: > >> This patch resets PCIe devices on boot to stop ongoing DMA. When > >> "pci=pcie_reset_devices" i

Re: [PATCH] Reset PCIe devices to stop ongoing DMA

2013-05-07 Thread Alex Williamson
On Wed, 2013-04-24 at 13:58 +0900, Takao Indoh wrote: > This patch resets PCIe devices on boot to stop ongoing DMA. When > "pci=pcie_reset_devices" is specified, a hot reset is triggered on each > PCIe root port and downstream port to reset its downstream endpoint. > > Problem: > This patch solves

Re: [PATCH 01/12] Security: Add CAP_COMPROMISE_KERNEL

2013-03-19 Thread Alex Williamson
On Tue, 2013-03-19 at 20:22 -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > On 03/19/2013 08:18 PM, Alex Williamson wrote: > >> > >> The "pinning" process needs to involve a call to the kernel to process > >> the page for DMA (pinning the page and opening it in the iommu) a

Re: [PATCH 01/12] Security: Add CAP_COMPROMISE_KERNEL

2013-03-19 Thread Alex Williamson
On Tue, 2013-03-19 at 20:08 -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > On 03/19/2013 07:48 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > > On 03/19/2013 06:28 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote: > >> Mm. The question is whether we can reliably determine the ranges a > device should be able to access without having to trust userspace > (