On 4 December 2015 at 02:58, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Wed, 2015-12-02 at 18:41 +0100, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>> Hi Pavel,
>>
>> Thanks for getting to the bottom of this.
>>
>> On 1 December 2015 at 14:03, Pavel Fedin wrote:
>> > This function takes st
On 3 December 2015 at 08:14, Pavel Fedin wrote:
> Hello!
>
>> > diff --git a/arch/arm/kvm/mmu.c b/arch/arm/kvm/mmu.c
>> > index 7dace90..51ad98f 100644
>> > --- a/arch/arm/kvm/mmu.c
>> > +++ b/arch/arm/kvm/mmu.c
>> > @@ -310,7 +310,8 @@ static void stage2_flush_ptes(struct kvm *kvm, pmd_t
>> > *
On 2 December 2015 at 19:50, Christoffer Dall
wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 01, 2015 at 04:03:52PM +0300, Pavel Fedin wrote:
>> This function takes stage-II physical addresses (A.K.A. IPA), on input, not
>> real physical addresses. This causes kvm_is_device_pfn() to return wrong
>> values, depending on how
Hi Pavel,
Thanks for getting to the bottom of this.
On 1 December 2015 at 14:03, Pavel Fedin wrote:
> This function takes stage-II physical addresses (A.K.A. IPA), on input, not
> real physical addresses. This causes kvm_is_device_pfn() to return wrong
> values, depending on how much guest and h
On 16 November 2015 at 14:11, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> Add the panic handler, together with the small bits of assembly
> code to call the kernel's panic implementation.
>
> Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier
> ---
> arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/hyp-entry.S | 11 ++-
> arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/hyp.h | 1 +
>
On 11 November 2015 at 03:03, Laura Abbott wrote:
>
> PAGE_S2_DEVICE is a pgprot val and needs to be accessed using the proper
> accessors. Switch to these accessors to avoid errors with
> STRICT_MM_TYPECHECK.
>
> Signed-off-by: Laura Abbott
> ---
> Found in the course of other work
Already fixe
deal with host
physical addresses, we can simply check whether the mapping is backed
by memory that is managed by the host kernel, and only perform the
D-cache maintenance if this is the case.
Signed-off-by: Ard Biesheuvel
Tested-by: Pavel Fedin
Reviewed-by: Christoffer Dall
---
Resending sin
On 10 November 2015 at 14:40, Christoffer Dall
wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 02:15:45PM +0100, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>> On 10 November 2015 at 13:22, Christoffer Dall
>> wrote:
>> > On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 10:45:37AM +0100, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>> >> Hi al
On 10 November 2015 at 13:22, Christoffer Dall
wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 10:45:37AM +0100, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I wonder if this is a better way to address the problem. It looks at
>> the nature of the memory rather than the nature of the mapp
(adding lists)
On 10 November 2015 at 10:45, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I wonder if this is a better way to address the problem. It looks at
> the nature of the memory rather than the nature of the mapping, which
> is probably a more reliable indicator of whether cache
On 4 November 2015 at 19:49, Christopher Covington wrote:
> On 11/04/2015 08:31 AM, Christoffer Dall wrote:
>> On Tue, Nov 03, 2015 at 01:39:44PM -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
>>> On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 1:17 PM, Mario Smarduch
>>> wrote:
On 11/3/2015 9:55 AM, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Tue, No
On 5 October 2015 at 14:02, Suzuki K. Poulose wrote:
> On 02/10/15 16:49, Catalin Marinas wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 04:41:18PM +0100, Suzuki K. Poulose wrote:
>>>
>>> From: Ard Biesheuvel
>>>
>>> This patch adds the page size to the
On 2 September 2015 at 11:48, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> On 13 August 2015 at 19:29, Catalin Marinas wrote:
>> On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 03:45:07PM +0100, Suzuki K. Poulose wrote:
>>> On 13/08/15 13:28, Steve Capper wrote:
>>> >On 13 August 2015 at 12:34,
On 2 September 2015 at 11:42, Suzuki K. Poulose wrote:
> On 02/09/15 10:38, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>>
>> On 13 August 2015 at 13:33, Suzuki K. Poulose
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> From: "Suzuki K. Poulose"
>>>
>>> We use section maps with
,
and everything seems to work fine. (I tested 2-level and 3-level)
I didn't test the KVM changes, so for all patches except those:
Reviewed-by: Ard Biesheuvel
Tested-by: Ard Biesheuvel
Regards,
Ard.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the
On 13 August 2015 at 19:29, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 03:45:07PM +0100, Suzuki K. Poulose wrote:
>> On 13/08/15 13:28, Steve Capper wrote:
>> >On 13 August 2015 at 12:34, Suzuki K. Poulose
>> >wrote:
>> >> __enable_mmu:
>> >>+ mrs x1, ID_AA64MMFR0_EL1
>> >>+
ymbol to make it clear those cases.
>
That sentence does not make sense.
> Cc: Ard Biesheuvel
> Cc: Mark Rutland
> Cc: Catalin Marinas
> Cc: Will Deacon
> Signed-off-by: Suzuki K. Poulose
> ---
> arch/arm64/include/asm/kernel-pgtable.h | 31 +---
On 31 August 2015 at 10:57, Christoffer Dall
wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 10:46:59AM +0200, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>> On 30 August 2015 at 15:54, Christoffer Dall
>> wrote:
>> > Provide a better quality of implementation and be architecture compliant
>> > on A
ng the timer output is not asserted after, for example, a
> PSCI system reset.
>
> This change alone fixes the UEFI reset issue reported by Laszlo back in
> February.
>
Do you have a link to that report? I can't quite remember the details ...
> Cc: Laszlo Ersek
> Cc:
On 26 March 2015 at 19:49, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> On 26 March 2015 at 19:45, Stefano Stabellini
> wrote:
>> On Thu, 26 Mar 2015, Andrew Jones wrote:
>>> On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 10:44:42AM +0100, Andrew Jones wrote:
>>> > Hello ARM virt maintainers,
>>&
On 26 March 2015 at 19:45, Stefano Stabellini
wrote:
> On Thu, 26 Mar 2015, Andrew Jones wrote:
>> On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 10:44:42AM +0100, Andrew Jones wrote:
>> > Hello ARM virt maintainers,
>> >
>> > I'd like to start a discussion about supporting virt-what[1]. virt-what
>> > allows userspace
On 5 March 2015 at 15:58, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 05, 2015 at 01:26:39PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> On 05/03/2015 13:03, Catalin Marinas wrote:
>> >> > I'd hate to have to do that. PCI should be entirely probeable
>> >> > given that we tell the guest where the host bridge is, that
On 4 March 2015 at 13:29, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 04, 2015 at 12:50:57PM +0100, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>> On 4 March 2015 at 12:35, Catalin Marinas wrote:
>> > On Mon, Mar 02, 2015 at 06:20:19PM -0800, Mario Smarduch wrote:
>> >> On 03/02/2015 08
On 4 March 2015 at 12:35, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> (please try to avoid top-posting)
>
> On Mon, Mar 02, 2015 at 06:20:19PM -0800, Mario Smarduch wrote:
>> On 03/02/2015 08:31 AM, Christoffer Dall wrote:
>> > However, my concern with these patches are on two points:
>> >
>> > 1. It's not a fix-all
On 24 February 2015 at 14:55, Andrew Jones wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 04:36:26PM +0100, Andrew Jones wrote:
>> On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 02:37:25PM +0000, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>> > On 20 February 2015 at 14:29, Andrew Jones wrote:
>> > > So looks like the
On 20 February 2015 at 14:29, Andrew Jones wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 06:57:24PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 19/02/2015 18:55, Andrew Jones wrote:
>> >> > > (I don't have an exact number for how many times it went to EL1
>> >> > > because
>> >> > > access_mair() doesn't have a
> On 19 feb. 2015, at 17:55, Andrew Jones wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 05:19:35PM +, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>>> On 19 February 2015 at 16:57, Andrew Jones wrote:
>>>> On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 10:54:43AM +, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>>>>
On 19 February 2015 at 16:57, Andrew Jones wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 10:54:43AM +0000, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>> This is a 0th order approximation of how we could potentially force the guest
>> to avoid uncached mappings, at least from the moment the MMU is on. (Before
On 19 February 2015 at 15:27, Alexander Graf wrote:
>
>
> On 19.02.15 15:56, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>> On 19 February 2015 at 14:50, Alexander Graf wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 19.02.15 11:54, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>>>> This is a 0th order approxima
On 19 February 2015 at 15:19, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On 19/02/15 13:44, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>> On 19 February 2015 at 13:40, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>>> On 19/02/15 10:54, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>>>> ---
>>>> arch/arm/kvm/mmu.c | 2 +-
On 19 February 2015 at 14:50, Alexander Graf wrote:
>
>
> On 19.02.15 11:54, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>> This is a 0th order approximation of how we could potentially force the guest
>> to avoid uncached mappings, at least from the moment the MMU is on. (Before
>> that,
On 19 February 2015 at 13:40, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On 19/02/15 10:54, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>> ---
>> arch/arm/kvm/mmu.c | 2 +-
>> arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_arm.h | 2 +-
>> 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --
.
Signed-off-by: Ard Biesheuvel
---
arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c | 35 ++-
1 file changed, 34 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c
index 1e170eab6603..bde2b49a7cd8 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c
+++ b/arch
asons.
Signed-off-by: Ard Biesheuvel
---
arch/arm64/kvm/hyp.S | 101 ++
arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c | 28 -
2 files changed, 120 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp.S b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp.S
index c3ca89c
---
arch/arm/kvm/mmu.c | 2 +-
arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_arm.h | 2 +-
2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm/kvm/mmu.c b/arch/arm/kvm/mmu.c
index 136662547ca6..fa8ec55220ea 100644
--- a/arch/arm/kvm/mmu.c
+++ b/arch/arm/kvm/mmu.c
@@ -1530,7 +1530,7
introduces a fast path
for EL2 to perform trivial sysreg writes on behalf of the guest, without the
need for a full world switch to the host and back.
The main purpose of these patches is to quantify the performance hit, and
verify whether the MAIR_EL1 handling works correctly.
Ard Biesheuvel (3
On 9 December 2014 at 13:38, Christoffer Dall
wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 09, 2014 at 01:29:52PM +0100, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>> On 9 December 2014 at 12:26, Christoffer Dall
>> wrote:
>> > From: Ard Biesheuvel
>> >
>> > Instead of using kvm_is_mmio_pfn() to d
On 9 December 2014 at 12:26, Christoffer Dall
wrote:
> From: Ard Biesheuvel
>
> Instead of using kvm_is_mmio_pfn() to decide whether a host region
> should be stage 2 mapped with device attributes, add a new static
> function kvm_is_device_pfn() that disregards RAM pages with the
On 21 November 2014 at 12:24, Christoffer Dall
wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 09:33:55AM +0100, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>> Instead of using kvm_is_mmio_pfn() to decide whether a host region
>> should be stage 2 mapped with device attributes, add a new static
>> function kvm
On 10 November 2014 09:33, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> This reverts commit 85c8555ff0 ("KVM: check for !is_zero_pfn() in
> kvm_is_mmio_pfn()") and renames the function to kvm_is_reserved_pfn.
>
> The problem being addressed by the patch above was that some ARM code
>
On 17 November 2014 15:58, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> Readonly memslots are often used to implement emulation of ROMs and
> NOR flashes, in which case the guest may legally map these regions as
> uncached.
> To deal with the incoherency associated with uncached guest mappings,
> tre
-off-by: Laszlo Ersek
Signed-off-by: Ard Biesheuvel
---
arch/arm/include/asm/kvm_mmu.h | 5 +++--
arch/arm/kvm/mmu.c | 9 +++--
arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_mmu.h | 5 +++--
3 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm/include/asm/kvm_mmu.h b/arch/
regions tagged as such are flushed to DRAM before being passed
to the guest.
Signed-off-by: Ard Biesheuvel
---
arch/arm/kvm/mmu.c | 20 +++-
1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm/kvm/mmu.c b/arch/arm/kvm/mmu.c
index cb924c6d56a6..f2a9874ff5cb
Memory regions may be incoherent with the caches, typically when the
guest has mapped a host system RAM backed memory region as uncached.
Add a flag KVM_MEMSLOT_INCOHERENT so that we can tag these memslots
and handle them appropriately when mapping them.
Signed-off-by: Ard Biesheuvel
On 10 November 2014 11:57, Christoffer Dall wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 09:33:55AM +0100, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>> Instead of using kvm_is_mmio_pfn() to decide whether a host region
>> should be stage 2 mapped with device attributes, add a new static
>> function kvm
On 10 November 2014 11:53, Christoffer Dall wrote:
> Hi Ard,
>
> On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 09:33:56AM +0100, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>> This reverts commit 85c8555ff0 ("KVM: check for !is_zero_pfn() in
>> kvm_is_mmio_pfn()") and renames the function to kvm_is_reserv
'
from the beginning, e.g., whether or not to call get_page/put_page on
it etc. This means that returning false for the zero page is a mistake
and the patch above should be reverted.
Signed-off-by: Ard Biesheuvel
---
arch/ia64/kvm/kvm-ia64.c | 2 +-
arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c | 6 +++---
incl
Instead of using kvm_is_mmio_pfn() to decide whether a host region
should be stage 2 mapped with device attributes, add a new static
function kvm_is_device_pfn() that disregards RAM pages with the
reserved bit set, as those should usually not be mapped as device
memory.
Signed-off-by: Ard
On 19 September 2014 10:03, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 19/09/2014 16:17, Ard Biesheuvel ha scritto:
>>
>>> > (**) Ard's patches for the upstream host kernel (== KVM) have been...
>>> > ugh, not sure... applied to a maintainer tree? Ard? :)
>>> >
On 18 September 2014 05:18, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
> On 09/18/14 13:44, Andreas Färber wrote:
>> Hello Laszlo,
>>
>> Am 18.09.2014 um 10:23 schrieb Laszlo Ersek:
>>> I've been made an offer that I couldn't refuse :) to "organize" a Birds
>>> of a Feather session concerning OVMF at the KVM Forum 2014.
On 12 September 2014 23:14, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Sep 2014 22:17:23 +0200 Ard Biesheuvel
> wrote:
>
>> In order to make the static inline function is_zero_pfn() callable by
>> modules, export its symbol dependencies 'zero_pfn' and (for s390 and
&g
ing a pfn whether it refers
to the zero page is required to correctly distinguish the zero page
from other special RAM ranges that may also have the PG_reserved bit
set, but need to be treated as MMIO memory.
Signed-off-by: Ard Biesheuvel
---
arch/mips/mm/init.c | 1 +
arch/s390/mm/init.
On 12 September 2014 19:25, kbuild test robot wrote:
> tree: git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/virt/kvm/kvm.git master
> head: e20e1bde3bb158cd3d08b9d94a90d3cabf1ba7cb
> commit: e20e1bde3bb158cd3d08b9d94a90d3cabf1ba7cb [11/11] KVM: check for
> !is_zero_pfn() in kvm_is_mmio_pfn()
> config: powerpc-
Read-only memory ranges may be backed by the zero page, so avoid
misidentifying it a a MMIO pfn.
Signed-off-by: Ard Biesheuvel
Fixes: b88657674d39 ("ARM: KVM: user_mem_abort: support stage 2 MMIO page
mapping")
---
This fixes another issue I identified when testing QEMU+KVM_UEFI, wh
unconditionally.
Instead of fixing both implementations of kvm_is_write_fault()
in place, reimplement it just once using kvm_vcpu_dabt_iswrite(),
which already does the right thing with respect to the WnR bit.
Also fix up the callers to pass 'vcpu'
Acked-by: Laszlo Ersek
Signed-off-by: Ard
On 9 September 2014 11:35, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> Hi Ard,
>
>
> On 2014-09-08 21:29, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>>
>> The ISS encoding for an exception from a Data Abort has a WnR
>> bit[6] that indicates whether the Data Abort was caused by a
>> read or a write
unconditionally.
Signed-off-by: Ard Biesheuvel
---
This fixes an issue I observed with UEFI running under QEMU/KVM using
NOR flash emulation and the upcoming KVM_CAP_READONLY_MEM support, where
NOR flash reads were mistaken for NOR flash writes, resulting in all read
accesses to go through the MMIO
a UEFI blob loaded with the -bios option in QEMU.
>
> Note that the MMIO exit on writes to a read-only memory is ABI and can
> be used to emulate block-erase style flash devices.
>
> Cc: Ard Biesheuvel
> Signed-off-by: Christoffer Dall
Tested-by: Ard Biesheuvel
58 matches
Mail list logo
