Re: question about napi_disable (was Re: [PATCH] virtio_net: set/cancel work on ndo_open/ndo_stop)

On 04/04/2012 05:32 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 09:12:38PM +1030, Rusty Russell wrote: > Michael S. Tsirkin noticed that we could run the refill work after > ndo_close, which can re-enable napi - we don't disable it until > virtnet_remove. This is clearly wrong, so

CPU softlockup due to smp_call_function()

On Wed, 4 Apr 2012 about 22:12:36 +0200, Sasha Levin wrote: > I've starting seeing soft lockups resulting from smp_call_function() > calls. I've attached two different backtraces of this happening with > different code paths. > > This is running inside a KVM guest with the trinity fuzzer, using >

[PATCH v2] kvm: Disable MSI/MSI-X in assigned device reset path

We've hit a kernel host panic, when issuing a 'system_reset' with an 82576 nic assigned and a Windows guest. Host system is a PowerEdge R815. [Hardware Error]: Hardware error from APEI Generic Hardware Error Source: 32993 [Hardware Error]: APEI generic hardware error status [Hardware Error]: sever

Re: Questing regarding KVM Guest PMU

On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 3:59 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote: > On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 03:49:42PM +0530, shashank rachamalla wrote: >> tatus: RO >> Content-Length: 2989 >> Lines: 79 >> >> On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 12:34 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote: >> > On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 12:24:17AM +0530, shashank rachamall

Re: [PATCH] Fix warning

On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 9:30 AM, Tadeusz Struk wrote: > Hi Bjorn, > Did you have chance to look at this one? Yep. It needs a changelog. "Fixed warning" is inadequate. It needs an explanation of what the VF connection is. It would also be nice if you fixed the function comment, which is unintel

Re: kvm: RCU warning in async pf

On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 2:30 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote: > On Tue, Apr 03, 2012 at 01:52:26PM +0300, Gleb Natapov wrote: >> On Mon, Apr 02, 2012 at 08:54:32PM -0400, Sasha Levin wrote: >> > Hi all, >> > >> > I got the spew at the bottom of the mail in a KVM guest using the KVM >> > tools and running t

Re: [PATCH] Fix warning

Hi Bjorn, Did you have chance to look at this one? Regards, Tadeusz On 01/03/12 17:18, tadeusz.st...@intel.com wrote: > From: Tadeusz Struk > Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2011 14:38:18 + > Subject: [PATCH] Fixed warning > > This patch fixes the following warning. > # virsh start fedora16-64 > kernel: [

Re: [Qemu-devel] KVM call minutes April 3

On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 03:21:26PM +0200, Igor Mammedov wrote: > On 04/04/2012 02:14 PM, Michael Roth wrote: > >On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 01:53:34PM +0300, Dor Laor wrote: > >>On 04/04/2012 01:37 PM, Michael Roth wrote: > >>> > >>>On Apr 4, 2012 2:42 AM, "Paolo Bonzini" >>>

Re: kvm: RCU warning in async pf

On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 07:04:16AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 03:30:33PM +0300, Gleb Natapov wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 03, 2012 at 01:52:26PM +0300, Gleb Natapov wrote: > > > On Mon, Apr 02, 2012 at 08:54:32PM -0400, Sasha Levin wrote: > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > I g

Re: kvm: RCU warning in async pf

On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 03:30:33PM +0300, Gleb Natapov wrote: > On Tue, Apr 03, 2012 at 01:52:26PM +0300, Gleb Natapov wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 02, 2012 at 08:54:32PM -0400, Sasha Levin wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > > > I got the spew at the bottom of the mail in a KVM guest using the KVM > > > tool

Re: [Qemu-devel] KVM call minutes April 3

On 04/04/2012 02:14 PM, Michael Roth wrote: On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 01:53:34PM +0300, Dor Laor wrote: On 04/04/2012 01:37 PM, Michael Roth wrote: On Apr 4, 2012 2:42 AM, "Paolo Bonzini"mailto:pbonz...@redhat.com>> wrote: Il 04/04/2012 03:18, Michael Roth ha scritto: Attacking the IDL/schem

Re: [PATCH 0/2] Improve iteration through sptes from rmap

On Wed, 21 Mar 2012 23:48:23 +0900 Takuya Yoshikawa wrote: > By removing sptep from rmap_iterator, I could achieve 15% performance > improvement without inlining. > > Takuya Yoshikawa (3): > KVM: MMU: Make pte_list_desc fit cache lines well > KVM: MMU: Improve iteration through sptes from rm

Re: kvm: RCU warning in async pf

On Tue, Apr 03, 2012 at 01:52:26PM +0300, Gleb Natapov wrote: > On Mon, Apr 02, 2012 at 08:54:32PM -0400, Sasha Levin wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > I got the spew at the bottom of the mail in a KVM guest using the KVM tools > > and running trinity. > > > > I'm not quite sure how default_idle manage

Re: [Qemu-devel] KVM call minutes April 3

On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 01:53:34PM +0300, Dor Laor wrote: > On 04/04/2012 01:37 PM, Michael Roth wrote: > > > >On Apr 4, 2012 2:42 AM, "Paolo Bonzini" >> wrote: > > > > > > Il 04/04/2012 03:18, Michael Roth ha scritto: > > > > Attacking the IDL/schema side first is the

Re: [Qemu-devel] KVM call minutes April 3

On 04/04/2012 02:52 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote: On 04/04/2012 05:53 AM, Dor Laor wrote: On 04/04/2012 01:37 PM, Michael Roth wrote: On Apr 4, 2012 2:42 AM, "Paolo Bonzini" mailto:pbonz...@redhat.com>> wrote: > > Il 04/04/2012 03:18, Michael Roth ha scritto: > > Attacking the IDL/schema side fir

Re: [PATCH v4] KVM: Introduce direct MSI message injection for in-kernel irqchips

On 2012-04-04 13:50, Avi Kivity wrote: > On 04/04/2012 01:48 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote: >>> >>> I'm not so sure anymore. Sorry about the U turn, but remind me why? In >>> the long term it will be slower. >> >> Likely not measurably slower. If you look at a message through the arch >> glasses, you can

Re: [Qemu-devel] KVM call minutes April 3

On 04/04/2012 05:53 AM, Dor Laor wrote: On 04/04/2012 01:37 PM, Michael Roth wrote: On Apr 4, 2012 2:42 AM, "Paolo Bonzini" mailto:pbonz...@redhat.com>> wrote: > > Il 04/04/2012 03:18, Michael Roth ha scritto: > > Attacking the IDL/schema side first is the more rationale approach. From > > ther

Re: [PATCH v4] KVM: Introduce direct MSI message injection for in-kernel irqchips

On 04/04/2012 01:48 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote: > > > > I'm not so sure anymore. Sorry about the U turn, but remind me why? In > > the long term it will be slower. > > Likely not measurably slower. If you look at a message through the arch > glasses, you can usually spot the destination directly, spec

Re: [Qemu-devel] KVM call minutes April 3

On 04/03/2012 03:43 PM, Dor Laor wrote: On 04/03/2012 05:43 PM, Markus Armbruster wrote: I'm afraid my notes are rather rough... * 1.1 soft freeze apr 15th (less than two weeks) hard freeze may 1 three months cycle for 1.2 stable machine types only every few releases? "pc-next" * Maintainers,

Re: [Qemu-devel] KVM call minutes April 3

On 04/04/2012 01:37 PM, Michael Roth wrote: On Apr 4, 2012 2:42 AM, "Paolo Bonzini" mailto:pbonz...@redhat.com>> wrote: > > Il 04/04/2012 03:18, Michael Roth ha scritto: > > Attacking the IDL/schema side first is the more rationale approach. From > > there we can potentially generate ASN.1 B

Re: [PATCH v4] KVM: Introduce direct MSI message injection for in-kernel irqchips

On 2012-04-04 11:55, Avi Kivity wrote: > On 04/04/2012 12:38 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote: >> On 2012-04-04 11:36, Avi Kivity wrote: >>> On 04/04/2012 12:22 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote: > >>> Until we do have this fast path we can just fill this value with zeros, >>> so kernel patch (almost) does not

[PATCH] KVM: PPC: bookehv: Fix save/restore of guest accessible SPRGs.

For Guest accessible SPRGs 4-7, save/restore must be handled differently for 64bit and non-64 bit case. The registers are maintained as 64 bit copies by KVM. While saving/restoring for the non-64 bit case we should always take the lower 4 bytes. Signed-off-by: Varun Sethi --- arch/powerpc/kvm/

Re: Questing regarding KVM Guest PMU

On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 03:49:42PM +0530, shashank rachamalla wrote: > tatus: RO > Content-Length: 2989 > Lines: 79 > > On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 12:34 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 12:24:17AM +0530, shashank rachamalla wrote: > >> On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 12:13 AM, shashank rach

Re: Questing regarding KVM Guest PMU

On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 12:34 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote: > On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 12:24:17AM +0530, shashank rachamalla wrote: >> On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 12:13 AM, shashank rachamalla >> wrote: >> > On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 10:28 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote: >> >> On Tue, Apr 03, 2012 at 07:20:04PM +0530,

Re: [PATCH v4] KVM: Introduce direct MSI message injection for in-kernel irqchips

On 04/04/2012 12:38 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote: > On 2012-04-04 11:36, Avi Kivity wrote: > > On 04/04/2012 12:22 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote: > >>> > > Until we do have this fast path we can just fill this value with zeros, > > so kernel patch (almost) does not need to change for this - > > just the

Re: question about napi_disable (was Re: [PATCH] virtio_net: set/cancel work on ndo_open/ndo_stop)

On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 12:32:29PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 09:12:38PM +1030, Rusty Russell wrote: > > Michael S. Tsirkin noticed that we could run the refill work after > > ndo_close, which can re-enable napi - we don't disable it until > > virtnet_remove. This i

Re: [PATCH v4] KVM: Introduce direct MSI message injection for in-kernel irqchips

On 2012-04-04 11:36, Avi Kivity wrote: > On 04/04/2012 12:22 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote: >>> > Until we do have this fast path we can just fill this value with zeros, > so kernel patch (almost) does not need to change for this - > just the header. Partially implemented interfaces in

Re: [PATCH v4] KVM: Introduce direct MSI message injection for in-kernel irqchips

On 04/04/2012 12:22 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote: > > > >>> Until we do have this fast path we can just fill this value with zeros, > >>> so kernel patch (almost) does not need to change for this - > >>> just the header. > >> > >> Partially implemented interfaces invite breakage. > > > > Hmm true. OK scr

question about napi_disable (was Re: [PATCH] virtio_net: set/cancel work on ndo_open/ndo_stop)

On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 09:12:38PM +1030, Rusty Russell wrote: > Michael S. Tsirkin noticed that we could run the refill work after > ndo_close, which can re-enable napi - we don't disable it until > virtnet_remove. This is clearly wrong, so move the workqueue control > to ndo_open and ndo_stop (a

Re: [PATCH v4] KVM: Introduce direct MSI message injection for in-kernel irqchips

On 2012-04-04 10:53, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 11:44:23AM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote: >> On 04/04/2012 11:38 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > A performance note: delivering an interrupt needs to search all vcpus > for an APIC ID match. The previous plan was

[PATCH RFC] virtio-net: remove useless disable on freeze

disable_cb is just an optimization: it can not guarantee that there are no callbacks. I didn't yet figure out whether a callback in freeze will trigger a bug, but disable_cb won't address it in any case. So let's remove the useless calls as a first step. Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin --- dr

Re: [PATCH v4] KVM: Introduce direct MSI message injection for in-kernel irqchips

On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 11:44:23AM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote: > On 04/04/2012 11:38 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > A performance note: delivering an interrupt needs to search all vcpus > > > > for an APIC ID match. The previous plan was to cache (or pre-calculate) > > > > this

[PATCH] kvm-autotest: Allow migration of multiple machines.

Change migration_multi_host test to migrate all vms on same time. https://github.com/autotest/autotest/pull/270 Signed-off-by: Jiří Župka --- client/tests/kvm/tests/migration_multi_host.py |3 ++- 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) diff --git a/client/tests/kvm/tests/migratio

[PATCH] Use the lower four bytes while restoring guest readable SPRGs.

From: Varun Sethi While restoring the hardware copies of guest SPRG4-7 registers we must use the the lower 4 bytes of the 64 bit sotware copies maintained by KVM. Signed-off-by: Varun Sethi --- arch/powerpc/kvm/booke_interrupts.S |8 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-

Re: [PATCH v4] KVM: Introduce direct MSI message injection for in-kernel irqchips

On 04/03/2012 08:24 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote: > > > >>> > >>> A performance note: delivering an interrupt needs to search all vcpus > >>> for an APIC ID match. The previous plan was to cache (or pre-calculate) > >>> this lookup in the irq routing table. Now it looks like we'll need a > >>> separate

Re: [PATCH v4] KVM: Introduce direct MSI message injection for in-kernel irqchips

On 04/04/2012 11:38 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > > > > > > A performance note: delivering an interrupt needs to search all vcpus > > > for an APIC ID match. The previous plan was to cache (or pre-calculate) > > > this lookup in the irq routing table. Now it looks like we'll need a > > >

[PATCH] Use the lower four bytes while restoring guest readable SPRGs.

While restoring the hardware copies of guest SPRG4-7 registers we must use the the lower 4 bytes of the 64 bit sotware copies maintained by KVM. Signed-off-by: Varun Sethi --- arch/powerpc/kvm/booke_interrupts.S |8 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/arch

Re: [RFC][PATCH v2 0/4] uq/master: Basic MSI support for in-kernel irqchip mode

On Tue, Apr 03, 2012 at 09:17:30PM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote: > On 2012-04-03 09:23, Jan Kiszka wrote: > > This is v2 of the RFC, fixing a memory leak in > > kvm_flush_dynamic_msi_routes and adding support for the proposed > > KVM_SIGNAL_MSI IOCTL. > > > > This series depends on "kvm: set gsi_bits a

Re: [RFC][PATCH v2 0/4] uq/master: Basic MSI support for in-kernel irqchip mode

On Tue, Apr 03, 2012 at 07:27:36PM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote: > On 2012-04-03 15:06, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 03, 2012 at 09:23:12AM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote: > >> This is v2 of the RFC, fixing a memory leak in > >> kvm_flush_dynamic_msi_routes and adding support for the proposed > >>

Re: [PATCH v4] KVM: Introduce direct MSI message injection for in-kernel irqchips

On Tue, Apr 03, 2012 at 06:47:49PM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote: > On 2012-04-03 18:27, Avi Kivity wrote: > > On 03/29/2012 09:14 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote: > >> Currently, MSI messages can only be injected to in-kernel irqchips by > >> defining a corresponding IRQ route for each message. This is not only >

[Bug 42636] PCI passthrough does not work with AMD iommu for PCI device

https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=42636 Alexandrov Stanislav changed: What|Removed |Added CC||n...@nya.ai --- Comment #8 fro

Re: [PATCH 4/4] virtio_blk: use disk_name_format() to support mass of disks naming

On Mon, Apr 02, 2012 at 12:00:45PM -0700, Tejun Heo wrote: > Hello, James. > > On Mon, Apr 02, 2012 at 11:56:18AM -0700, James Bottomley wrote: > > So if we're agreed no other devices going forwards should ever use this > > interface, is there any point unifying the interface? No matter how > > m

Re: [Qemu-devel] KVM call minutes April 3

Il 04/04/2012 03:18, Michael Roth ha scritto: > Attacking the IDL/schema side first is the more rationale approach. From > there we can potentially generate ASN.1 BER/DER visitors for the protocol > side, or potentially even just vmstate bindings as a start. I've recently > started looking into the

Re: Questing regarding KVM Guest PMU

On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 12:24:17AM +0530, shashank rachamalla wrote: > On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 12:13 AM, shashank rachamalla > wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 10:28 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote: > >> On Tue, Apr 03, 2012 at 07:20:04PM +0530, shashank rachamalla wrote: > >>> On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 12: