Re: [PATCH v2] KVM: Cleanup the kvm_print functions and introduce pr_XX wrappers

2012-06-01 Thread Marcelo Tosatti
On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 12:22:59PM -0400, Christoffer Dall wrote: > Introduces a couple of print functions, which are essentially wrappers > around standard printk functions, with a KVM: prefix. > > Functions introduced or modified are: > - kvm_err(fmt, ...) > - kvm_info(fmt, ...) > - kvm_debug

Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] KVM: Optimize vcpu->requests slow path slightly

2012-06-01 Thread Marcelo Tosatti
On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 12:27:09PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote: > >> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c > >> index 953e692..c0209eb 100644 > >> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c > >> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c > >> @@ -5232,55 +5232,58 @@ static int vcpu_enter_guest(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > >>

Re: [PATCH 0/5] pci-assign: More small cleanups

2012-06-01 Thread Marcelo Tosatti
On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 11:05:37AM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote: > Besides an update for hiding unsupported ioport BARs and tiny code > massages, this removes the obsolete iommu property from the pci-assign > device. > > Jan Kiszka (5): > pci-assign: Hide ioport regions on lacking sysfs support > p

Re: [PATCH 1/3 - qemu-kvm stable-1.0] Fix conditional build of various x86 specific bits

2012-06-01 Thread Marcelo Tosatti
On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 12:14:50PM +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > This adds/modifies ifdefs etc. and moves code to make sure that > x86-specific code doesn't get compiled on non-x86 platforms. > These changes all relate to code that is in the qemu-kvm tree and > not in the qemu tree. > > T

Re: [PATCH] kvm: document lapic regs field

2012-06-01 Thread Marcelo Tosatti
On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 07:16:14PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > The logic in find_highest_vector looks > strange until you realize the reason for the > weird memory layout, which is because this is > what the CPU microcode expects. > > Add a comment so this stops tripping people up. > > Sig

Re: [PATCH] KVM: Use IRQF_ONESHOT for assigned device MSI interrupts

2012-06-01 Thread Jan Kiszka
On 2012-06-01 19:59, Alex Williamson wrote: Hmm, can't we trust the information that an IRQ grabbed here is really a MSI type? >>> >>> >>> Apparently not, comment added with this check (1c6c6952): >>> >>>* The interrupt was requested with handler = NULL, so >>>* we use th

Re: [PATCH] KVM: Use IRQF_ONESHOT for assigned device MSI interrupts

2012-06-01 Thread Alex Williamson
On Fri, 2012-06-01 at 19:14 +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote: > On 2012-06-01 19:03, Alex Williamson wrote: > > On Fri, 2012-06-01 at 18:39 +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote: > >> On 2012-06-01 18:16, Alex Williamson wrote: > >>> The kernel no longer allows us to pass NULL for a hard interrupt > >>> handler without I

Re: [PATCH] KVM: Use IRQF_ONESHOT for assigned device MSI interrupts

2012-06-01 Thread Jan Kiszka
On 2012-06-01 19:03, Alex Williamson wrote: > On Fri, 2012-06-01 at 18:39 +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote: >> On 2012-06-01 18:16, Alex Williamson wrote: >>> The kernel no longer allows us to pass NULL for a hard interrupt >>> handler without IRQF_ONESHOT. Should have been using this flag >>> anyway. >> >

Re: [PATCH] KVM: Use IRQF_ONESHOT for assigned device MSI interrupts

2012-06-01 Thread Alex Williamson
On Fri, 2012-06-01 at 18:39 +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote: > On 2012-06-01 18:16, Alex Williamson wrote: > > The kernel no longer allows us to pass NULL for a hard interrupt > > handler without IRQF_ONESHOT. Should have been using this flag > > anyway. > > This make the IRQ handling tail a bit slower (

Re: [PATCH] KVM: Use IRQF_ONESHOT for assigned device MSI interrupts

2012-06-01 Thread Jan Kiszka
On 2012-06-01 18:16, Alex Williamson wrote: > The kernel no longer allows us to pass NULL for a hard interrupt > handler without IRQF_ONESHOT. Should have been using this flag > anyway. This make the IRQ handling tail a bit slower (due to irq_finalize_oneshot). MSIs are edge-triggered, so there w

[PATCH] KVM: Use IRQF_ONESHOT for assigned device MSI interrupts

2012-06-01 Thread Alex Williamson
The kernel no longer allows us to pass NULL for a hard interrupt handler without IRQF_ONESHOT. Should have been using this flag anyway. Fixes: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=43328 Signed-off-by: Alex Williamson --- virt/kvm/assigned-dev.c |4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions

Re: WARNING: at arch/x86/kernel/smp.c:119 native_smp_send_reschedule+0x25/0x43()

2012-06-01 Thread Borislav Petkov
On Thu, Apr 05, 2012 at 01:38:41PM -0700, Tony Luck wrote: > A plain v3.3 kernel hits this when I just type "reboot" on a 32 cpu (2 > socket * 8 core * 2 HT) system: Same here on latest linus on a 24 CPU box right before the box reboots: [ 6851.207504] [ cut here ] [ 6851.

Re: Biweekly KVM Test report, kernel 51bfd299... qemu a1fce560...

2012-06-01 Thread Jan Kiszka
On 2012-06-01 09:57, Ren, Yongjie wrote: >> -Original Message- >> From: Marcelo Tosatti [mailto:mtosa...@redhat.com] >> Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2012 4:28 AM >> To: Ren, Yongjie >> Cc: Kevin Wolf; Avi Kivity; kvm@vger.kernel.org; Liu, RongrongX >> Subject: Re: Biweekly KVM Test report, kerne

[PATCH] KVM: PPC: Book3S HV: Drop locks around call to kvmppc_pin_guest_page

2012-06-01 Thread Paul Mackerras
At the moment we call kvmppc_pin_guest_page() in kvmppc_update_vpa() with two spinlocks held: the vcore lock and the vcpu->vpa_update_lock. This is not good, since kvmppc_pin_guest_page() calls down_read() and get_user_pages_fast(), both of which can sleep. This bug was introduced in 2e25aa5f ("KV

[PATCH v3] virtio_blk: unlock vblk->lock during kick

2012-06-01 Thread Stefan Hajnoczi
Holding the vblk->lock across kick causes poor scalability in SMP guests. If one CPU is doing virtqueue kick and another CPU touches the vblk->lock it will have to spin until virtqueue kick completes. This patch reduces system% CPU utilization in SMP guests that are running multithreaded I/O-boun

Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] virtio-blk: Use block layer provided spinlock

2012-06-01 Thread Michael S. Tsirkin
On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 04:03:27PM +0800, Asias He wrote: > Block layer will allocate a spinlock for the queue if the driver does > not provide one in blk_init_queue(). > > The reason to use the internal spinlock is that blk_cleanup_queue() will > switch to use the internal spinlock in the cleanup

RE: Biweekly KVM Test report, kernel 51bfd299... qemu a1fce560...

2012-06-01 Thread Ren, Yongjie
> -Original Message- > From: Marcelo Tosatti [mailto:mtosa...@redhat.com] > Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2012 4:30 AM > To: Ren, Yongjie > Cc: Kevin Wolf; Avi Kivity; kvm@vger.kernel.org; Liu, RongrongX > Subject: Re: Biweekly KVM Test report, kernel 51bfd299... qemu > a1fce560... > > On Tue, M

Re: [PATCH v2] virtio_blk: unlock vblk->lock during kick

2012-06-01 Thread Stefan Hajnoczi
On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 5:38 AM, Asias He wrote: > On 05/30/2012 09:19 PM, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote: > Could you use vblk->disk->queue->queue_lock to reference the lock so that > this patch will work on top of this one: > >   virtio-blk: Use block layer provided spinlock Absolutely. I'll rebased on

RE: Biweekly KVM Test report, kernel 51bfd299... qemu a1fce560...

2012-06-01 Thread Ren, Yongjie
> -Original Message- > From: Marcelo Tosatti [mailto:mtosa...@redhat.com] > Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2012 4:28 AM > To: Ren, Yongjie > Cc: Kevin Wolf; Avi Kivity; kvm@vger.kernel.org; Liu, RongrongX > Subject: Re: Biweekly KVM Test report, kernel 51bfd299... qemu > a1fce560... > > On Tue, M

[Bug 43328] VT-d/SR-IOV doesn't work in guest

2012-06-01 Thread bugzilla-daemon
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=43328 --- Comment #4 from Jay Ren 2012-06-01 07:25:47 --- Created an attachment (id=73486) --> (https://bugzilla.kernel.org/attachment.cgi?id=73486) host dmesg log -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ---

[Bug 43328] VT-d/SR-IOV doesn't work in guest

2012-06-01 Thread bugzilla-daemon
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=43328 --- Comment #3 from Jay Ren 2012-06-01 07:25:22 --- Created an attachment (id=73485) --> (https://bugzilla.kernel.org/attachment.cgi?id=73485) guest dmesg log -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --

[Bug 43328] VT-d/SR-IOV doesn't work in guest

2012-06-01 Thread bugzilla-daemon
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=43328 --- Comment #2 from Jay Ren 2012-06-01 07:24:09 --- Created an attachment (id=73484) --> (https://bugzilla.kernel.org/attachment.cgi?id=73484) host lspci log -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ---

[Bug 43328] VT-d/SR-IOV doesn't work in guest

2012-06-01 Thread bugzilla-daemon
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=43328 --- Comment #1 from Jay Ren 2012-06-01 07:23:46 --- Created an attachment (id=73483) --> (https://bugzilla.kernel.org/attachment.cgi?id=73483) guest lspci log -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --

[Bug 43328] New: VT-d/SR-IOV doesn't work in guest

2012-06-01 Thread bugzilla-daemon
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=43328 Summary: VT-d/SR-IOV doesn't work in guest Product: Virtualization Version: unspecified Kernel Version: 3.4.0 Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Tree: Mainline Status: NE