On Aug 17, 2014, at 9:28 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 17/08/2014 08:23, Nadav Amit ha scritto:
>> Although this check is mentioned in table 7-1 of the SDM as causing a
>> #TSS exception, it is not mentioned in table 6-6 that lists "invalid TSS
>> conditions" which cause #TSS excepti
Il 13/08/2014 20:33, Andy Lutomirski ha scritto:
> As for doing arch_random_init after clone/migration, I think we'll
> need another KVM extension for that, since, AFAIK, we don't actually
> get notified that we were cloned or migrated. That will be
> nontrivial. Maybe we can figure that out at K
Il 15/08/2014 18:54, Marcelo Tosatti ha scritto:
>
> Ping on integration.
It's been in kvm/next for a while, and is now in Linus's tree:
commit 0d3da0d26e3c3515997c99451ce3b0ad1a69a36c
Author: Tomasz Grabiec
AuthorDate: Tue Jun 24 09:42:43 2014 +0200
Commit: Paolo Bonzini
CommitDate: W
Il 17/08/2014 09:19, Nadav Amit ha scritto:
> Can you please assist in running the existing task-switch tests first?
>
> In x86_64 the task-switch tests are skipped. If I configure the tests to use
> the i386 architecture, the build fails.
> Even after fixing the compilation errors, I don’t manag
Broken by commit 57b4317dc6758dd8b478609b1312685795654e01.
Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini
---
lib/x86/isr.c | 10 +-
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/lib/x86/isr.c b/lib/x86/isr.c
index b0c6f53..833564a 100644
--- a/lib/x86/isr.c
+++ b/lib/x86/isr.c
@@ -93,13 +
On Fri, Aug 15, 2014 at 11:40:08AM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
> After rx vq was enabled, we never stop polling its socket. This is sub optimal
> when may lead unnecessary wake-ups after the rx net work has already been
> queued. This could be optimized by stopping polling the rx net sock when
> proce
On Fri, Aug 15, 2014 at 10:55:32AM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
> >>> I wonder if k->set_guest_notifiers should be called after "hdev->started
> >>> = true;" in vhost_dev_start.
> >> Michael, can we just remove those assertions? Since you may want to set
> >> guest notifiers before starting the backen
> >
> > Hi Michael,
> >
> > Sorry for the delay, had some problems with my mailbox, and I realized
> > just now that
> > my reply wasn't sent.
> > The vm indeed ALWAYS utilized 100% cpu, whether polling was enabled or
> > not.
> > The vhost thread utilized less than 100% (of the other cpu) w
On Sun, Aug 17, 2014 at 03:35:39PM +0300, Razya Ladelsky wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Michael,
> > >
> > > Sorry for the delay, had some problems with my mailbox, and I realized
>
> > > just now that
> > > my reply wasn't sent.
> > > The vm indeed ALWAYS utilized 100% cpu, whether polling was enabled
Commit 5045b46803 added a check that cs.dpl equals cs.rpl during task-switch.
This is a wrong check, and this test introduces a test in which cs.dpl !=
cs.rpl. To do so, it configures tss.cs to be conforming with rpl=3 and dpl=0.
Since the cpl after calling is 3, it does not make any prints in the
This reverts commit 5045b468037dfe1c848827ce10e99d87f5669160. Although the
cs.dpl=cs.rpl check is mentioned in table 7-1 of the SDM as causing a #TSS
exception, it is not mentioned in table 6-6 that lists "invalid TSS conditions"
which cause #TSS exceptions. As it causes some tests, which pass on
Il 17/08/2014 21:32, Nadav Amit ha scritto:
> This reverts commit 5045b468037dfe1c848827ce10e99d87f5669160. Although the
> cs.dpl=cs.rpl check is mentioned in table 7-1 of the SDM as causing a #TSS
> exception, it is not mentioned in table 6-6 that lists "invalid TSS
> conditions"
> which cause #
Il 17/08/2014 23:09, Paolo Bonzini ha scritto:
> Il 17/08/2014 21:32, Nadav Amit ha scritto:
>> This reverts commit 5045b468037dfe1c848827ce10e99d87f5669160. Although the
>> cs.dpl=cs.rpl check is mentioned in table 7-1 of the SDM as causing a #TSS
>> exception, it is not mentioned in table 6-6 th
On Aug 18, 2014, at 12:13 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 17/08/2014 23:09, Paolo Bonzini ha scritto:
>> Il 17/08/2014 21:32, Nadav Amit ha scritto:
>>> This reverts commit 5045b468037dfe1c848827ce10e99d87f5669160. Although the
>>> cs.dpl=cs.rpl check is mentioned in table 7-1 of the SDM as causi
On Aug 18, 2014, at 12:09 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 17/08/2014 21:32, Nadav Amit ha scritto:
>> This reverts commit 5045b468037dfe1c848827ce10e99d87f5669160. Although the
>> cs.dpl=cs.rpl check is mentioned in table 7-1 of the SDM as causing a #TSS
>> exception, it is not mentioned in table
Il 17/08/2014 23:33, Nadav Amit ha scritto:
>> > Also, what about the rpl > cpl test below, for non-conforming code
>> > segments? It is not mentioned in table 6-6 either.
> As far as I understand, after task-switch cpl = cs.rpl. This is how the
> load_state_from_tss32 does it, and follows SDM 7.
Il 17/08/2014 23:39, Nadav Amit ha scritto:
> I missed the TS_VECTOR thing. Yes, in that case, full revert makes no
> sense. I’m in no hurry with this patch, and I posted it during your
> vacation only because it is a recent bug. Anyhow, you may want to
> look at another patch I sent, "KVM: x86: Av
>> >> Hi, all
>> >> I'm using VFIO to assign intel 82599 VF to VM, now I encounter a problem,
>> >> 82599 PF and its VFs belong to the same iommu_group, but I only want to
>> >> assign some VFs to one VM, and some other VFs to another VM, ...,
>> >> so how to only unbind (part of) the VFs but PF?
On Mon, 2014-08-18 at 09:00 +0800, Zhang Haoyu wrote:
> >> >> Hi, all
> >> >> I'm using VFIO to assign intel 82599 VF to VM, now I encounter a
> >> >> problem,
> >> >> 82599 PF and its VFs belong to the same iommu_group, but I only want to
> >> >> assign some VFs to one VM, and some other VFs to
Hi Nadav,
On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 05:21:19PM +0300, Nadav Amit wrote:
>Recent Intel CPUs have 10 variable range MTRRs. Since operating systems
>sometime make assumptions on CPUs while they ignore capability MSRs, it is
>better for KVM to be consistent with recent CPUs. Reporting more MTRRs than
>ac
Chen, Tiejun wrote on 2014-08-15:
> On 2014/8/14 3:16, Wei Wang wrote:
>> From: Yang Zhang
>>
>> Guest may mask the IOAPIC entry before issue EOI. In such case,
>> EOI will not be intercepted by hypervisor due to the corrensponding
>
> s/corrensponding/corresponding
>
>> bit in eoi exit bitmap
On 08/17/2014 06:20 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 15, 2014 at 11:40:08AM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
>> After rx vq was enabled, we never stop polling its socket. This is sub
>> optimal
>> when may lead unnecessary wake-ups after the rx net work has already been
>> queued. This could be
Hi Christian,
On Tue, Aug 05, 2014 at 04:44:14PM +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
>We currently track the pid of the task that runs the VCPU in
>vcpu_load. Since we call vcpu_load for all kind of ioctls on a
>CPU, this causes hickups due to synchronize_rcu if one CPU is
>modified by another CPU
On 08/17/2014 06:22 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 15, 2014 at 10:55:32AM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
> I wonder if k->set_guest_notifiers should be called after "hdev->started
> = true;" in vhost_dev_start.
Michael, can we just remove those assertions? Since you may want to
This should have been a benign patch. I'll try to get windows 7 installation
disk and check ASAP.
Nadav
> On 18 Aug 2014, at 05:17, Wanpeng Li wrote:
>
> Hi Nadav,
>> On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 05:21:19PM +0300, Nadav Amit wrote:
>> Recent Intel CPUs have 10 variable range MTRRs. Since operating
25 matches
Mail list logo
