RE: HAPPY NEW YEAR

From: Carl Leinbach Sent: Wednesday, January 06, 2016 4:21 PM To: Carl Leinbach Subject: HAPPY NEW YEAR Donation has been made to you by Mrs. Liliane Bettencourt. Contact email: mrslilianebettencou...@gmail.com for more details -- To unsubscribe from this

Re: [PATCH] KVM: PPC: fix ONE_REG AltiVec support

Happy new year ! On Wed, 16 Dec 2015 18:24:03 +0100 Greg Kurz wrote: > The get and set operations got exchanged by mistake when moving the > code from book3s.c to powerpc.c. > > Fixes: 3840edc8033ad5b86deee309c1c321ca54257452 > Signed-off-by: Greg Kurz

Re: [PATCH v1] kvm: Make vcpu->requests as 64 bit bitmap

VENT(kvm_check_requests, > > TP_fast_assign( > __entry->cpu_nr = vcpu->vcpu_id; > - __entry->requests = vcpu->requests; > + __entry->requests = (__u32)kvm_vcpu_requests(vcpu)[0]; > ), &g

Re: [PATCH v1] kvm: Make vcpu->requests as 64 bit bitmap

On 12/24/2015 02:14 PM, Roman Kagan wrote: On Thu, Dec 24, 2015 at 12:30:26PM +0300, Andrey Smetanin wrote: Currently on x86 arch we has already 32 requests defined so the newer request bits can't be placed inside vcpu->requests(unsigned long) inside x86 32 bit system. But we are going to add

Re: [PATCH v1] kvm: Make vcpu->requests as 64 bit bitmap

On Thu, Dec 24, 2015 at 12:30:26PM +0300, Andrey Smetanin wrote: > Currently on x86 arch we has already 32 requests defined > so the newer request bits can't be placed inside > vcpu->requests(unsigned long) inside x86 32 bit system. > But we are going to add a new request in x86 arch > for Hyper-V

Re: [PATCH v2] kvm: Make vcpu->requests as 64 bit bitmap

On Thu, Dec 24, 2015 at 04:29:21PM +0300, Andrey Smetanin wrote: > Currently on x86 arch we has already 32 requests defined > so the newer request bits can't be placed inside > vcpu->requests(unsigned long) inside x86 32 bit system. > But we are going to add a new request in x86 arch > for Hyper-V

Re: [PATCH kernel 7/9] KVM: PPC: Move reusable bits of H_PUT_TCE handler to helpers

On 12/08/2015 04:27 PM, David Gibson wrote: On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 08:49:37PM +1000, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote: Upcoming multi-tce support (H_PUT_TCE_INDIRECT/H_STUFF_TCE hypercalls) will validate TCE (not to have unexpected bits) and IO address (to be within the DMA window boundaries). This

Re: [PATCH kernel 9/9] KVM: PPC: Add support for multiple-TCE hcalls

On 12/08/2015 04:48 PM, David Gibson wrote: On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 08:49:39PM +1000, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote: This adds real and virtual mode handlers for the H_PUT_TCE_INDIRECT and H_STUFF_TCE hypercalls for user space emulated devices such as IBMVIO devices or emulated PCI. These calls

Re: [PATCH v2] KVM: PPC: Exit guest upon fatal machine check exception

On Thursday 17 December 2015 08:02 AM, David Gibson wrote: > On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 11:26:12AM +0530, Aravinda Prasad wrote: >> This patch modifies KVM to cause a guest exit with >> KVM_EXIT_NMI instead of immediately delivering a 0x200 >> interrupt to guest upon machine check exception in >>

Re: [PATCH v2] KVM: PPC: Exit guest upon fatal machine check exception

On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 11:26:12AM +0530, Aravinda Prasad wrote: > This patch modifies KVM to cause a guest exit with > KVM_EXIT_NMI instead of immediately delivering a 0x200 > interrupt to guest upon machine check exception in > guest address. Exiting the guest enables QEMU to build > error log

Re: [PATCH v2] KVM: PPC: Exit guest upon fatal machine check exception

On Wednesday 16 December 2015 03:10 PM, Thomas Huth wrote: > On 16/12/15 06:56, Aravinda Prasad wrote: >> This patch modifies KVM to cause a guest exit with >> KVM_EXIT_NMI instead of immediately delivering a 0x200 >> interrupt to guest upon machine check exception in >> guest address. Exiting

Re: [PATCH v2] KVM: PPC: Exit guest upon fatal machine check exception

On 16/12/15 06:56, Aravinda Prasad wrote: > This patch modifies KVM to cause a guest exit with > KVM_EXIT_NMI instead of immediately delivering a 0x200 > interrupt to guest upon machine check exception in > guest address. Exiting the guest enables QEMU to build > error log and deliver machine

Re: [PATCH v2] KVM: PPC: Exit guest upon fatal machine check exception

Hi, > This patch also introduces a new KVM capability to > control how KVM behaves on machine check exception. > Without this capability, KVM redirects machine check > exceptions to guest's 0x200 vector if the address in > error belongs to guest. With this capability KVM > causes a guest exit

Re: [GIT PULL] Please pull my kvm-ppc-fixes branch

On 10/12/2015 04:12, Paul Mackerras wrote: > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/paulus/powerpc.git > kvm-ppc-fixes Pulled, thanks. Paolo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm-ppc" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info

Re: [PATCH 1/1] KVM: PPC: Increase memslots to 320

On 09/12/15 04:28, Paul Mackerras wrote: > On Wed, Nov 04, 2015 at 10:03:48AM +0100, Thomas Huth wrote: >> Only using 32 memslots for KVM on powerpc is way too low, you can >> nowadays hit this limit quite fast by adding a couple of PCI devices >> and/or pluggable memory DIMMs to the guest. >> x86

Re: [PATCH] KVM: PPC: Fix emulation of H_SET_DABR/X on POWER8

On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 09:11:45AM +0100, Thomas Huth wrote: > In the old DABR register, the BT (Breakpoint Translation) bit > is bit number 61. In the new DAWRX register, the WT (Watchpoint > Translation) bit is bit number 59. So to move the DABR-BT bit > into the position of the DAWRX-WT bit, it

Re: [PATCH] kvm: remove unused variable 'vcpu_book3s'

On Tue, Dec 01, 2015 at 08:42:10PM -0300, Geyslan G. Bem wrote: > The vcpu_book3s struct is assigned but never used. So remove it. > > Signed-off-by: Geyslan G. Bem Thanks, applied to my kvm-ppc-next branch. Paul. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe

Re: [PATCH] KVM: PPC: Increase memslots to 512

On Wed, Dec 09, 2015 at 11:34:07AM +0100, Thomas Huth wrote: > Only using 32 memslots for KVM on powerpc is way too low, you can > nowadays hit this limit quite fast by adding a couple of PCI devices > and/or pluggable memory DIMMs to the guest. > > x86 already increased the KVM_USER_MEM_SLOTS to

Re: [PATCH kernel 5/9] KVM: PPC: Account TCE-containing pages in locked_vm

On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 08:49:35PM +1000, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote: > At the moment pages used for TCE tables (in addition to pages addressed > by TCEs) are not counted in locked_vm counter so a malicious userspace > tool can call ioctl(KVM_CREATE_SPAPR_TCE) as many times as RLIMIT_NOFILE and >

Re: [PATCH kernel 7/9] KVM: PPC: Move reusable bits of H_PUT_TCE handler to helpers

On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 08:49:37PM +1000, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote: > Upcoming multi-tce support (H_PUT_TCE_INDIRECT/H_STUFF_TCE hypercalls) > will validate TCE (not to have unexpected bits) and IO address > (to be within the DMA window boundaries). > > This introduces helpers to validate TCE

Re: [PATCH kernel 6/9] KVM: PPC: Replace SPAPR_TCE_SHIFT with IOMMU_PAGE_SHIFT_4K

On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 08:49:36PM +1000, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote: > SPAPR_TCE_SHIFT is used in few places only and since IOMMU_PAGE_SHIFT_4K > can be easily used instead, remove SPAPR_TCE_SHIFT. > > Signed-off-by: Alexey Kardashevskiy Reviewed-by: David Gibson

Re: [PATCH kernel 9/9] KVM: PPC: Add support for multiple-TCE hcalls

On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 08:49:39PM +1000, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote: > This adds real and virtual mode handlers for the H_PUT_TCE_INDIRECT and > H_STUFF_TCE hypercalls for user space emulated devices such as IBMVIO > devices or emulated PCI. These calls allow adding multiple entries > (up to

Re: [PATCH 1/1] KVM: PPC: Increase memslots to 320

On Wed, Nov 04, 2015 at 10:03:48AM +0100, Thomas Huth wrote: > Only using 32 memslots for KVM on powerpc is way too low, you can > nowadays hit this limit quite fast by adding a couple of PCI devices > and/or pluggable memory DIMMs to the guest. > x86 already increased the limit to 512 in total,

Re: powerpc/64: Include KVM guest test in all interrupt vectors

On Thu, 2015-12-11 at 05:44:42 UTC, Paul Mackerras wrote: > Currently, if HV KVM is configured but PR KVM isn't, we don't include > a test to see whether we were interrupted in KVM guest context for the > set of interrupts which get delivered directly to the guest by hardware > if they occur in

Re: [PATCH] KVM: PPC: Fix emulation of H_SET_DABR/X on POWER8

On 20/11/15 09:11, Thomas Huth wrote: > In the old DABR register, the BT (Breakpoint Translation) bit > is bit number 61. In the new DAWRX register, the WT (Watchpoint > Translation) bit is bit number 59. So to move the DABR-BT bit > into the position of the DAWRX-WT bit, it has to be shifted by >

Re: [PATCH kernel 3/9] KVM: PPC: Rework H_PUT_TCE/H_GET_TCE handlers

On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 08:49:33PM +1000, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote: > This reworks the existing H_PUT_TCE/H_GET_TCE handlers to have one > exit path. This allows next patch to add locks nicely. I don't see a problem with the actual code, but it doesn't seem to match this description: I still

Re: [PATCH kernel 1/9] rcu: Define notrace version of list_for_each_entry_rcu

On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 08:49:31PM +1000, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote: > This defines list_for_each_entry_rcu_notrace and list_entry_rcu_notrace > which use rcu_dereference_raw_notrace instead of rcu_dereference_raw. > This allows using list_for_each_entry_rcu_notrace in real mode (MMU is off). >

Re: [PATCH kernel 4/9] KVM: PPC: Use RCU for arch.spapr_tce_tables

On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 08:49:34PM +1000, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote: > At the moment spapr_tce_tables is not protected against races. This makes > use of RCU-variants of list helpers. As some bits are executed in real > mode, this makes use of just introduced list_for_each_entry_rcu_notrace(). >

Re: [PATCH kernel 2/9] KVM: PPC: Make real_vmalloc_addr() public

On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 08:49:32PM +1000, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote: > This helper translates vmalloc'd addresses to linear addresses. > It is only used by the KVM MMU code now and resides in the HV KVM code. > We will need it further in the TCE code and the DMA memory preregistration > code

Re: [PATCH] kvm: remove unused variable 'vcpu_book3s'

"Geyslan G. Bem" writes: > The vcpu_book3s struct is assigned but never used. So remove it. Just out of interest, how did you find this? Compiler warning? Static analysis? Manual inspection? Thanks in advance! Regards, Daniel > > Signed-off-by: Geyslan G. Bem

Re: [PATCH] kvm: remove unused variable 'vcpu_book3s'

2015-12-01 21:34 GMT-03:00 Daniel Axtens : > "Geyslan G. Bem" writes: > >> The vcpu_book3s struct is assigned but never used. So remove it. > > Just out of interest, how did you find this? Compiler warning? Static > analysis? Manual inspection? Sorry, I should

Re: [RFC] kvm - possible out of bounds

On Sun, Nov 29, 2015 at 05:14:03PM -0300, Geyslan Gregório Bem wrote: > Hello, > > I have found a possible out of bounds reading in > arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_64_mmu.c (kvmppc_mmu_book3s_64_xlate > function). pteg[] array could be accessed twice using the i variable > after the for iteration. What

Re: [RFC] kvm - possible out of bounds

2015-11-29 18:33 GMT-03:00 Paul Mackerras : > On Sun, Nov 29, 2015 at 05:14:03PM -0300, Geyslan Gregório Bem wrote: >> Hello, >> >> I have found a possible out of bounds reading in >> arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_64_mmu.c (kvmppc_mmu_book3s_64_xlate >> function). pteg[] array could

Re: [PATCH kernel 5/9] KVM: PPC: Account TCE-containing pages in locked_vm

On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 08:49:35PM +1000, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote: > At the moment pages used for TCE tables (in addition to pages addressed > by TCEs) are not counted in locked_vm counter so a malicious userspace > tool can call ioctl(KVM_CREATE_SPAPR_TCE) as many times as RLIMIT_NOFILE and >

Re: [PATCH kernel 5/9] KVM: PPC: Account TCE-containing pages in locked_vm

On 11/30/2015 01:06 PM, Paul Mackerras wrote: On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 08:49:35PM +1000, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote: At the moment pages used for TCE tables (in addition to pages addressed by TCEs) are not counted in locked_vm counter so a malicious userspace tool can call

Re: [PATCH] KVM: PPC: Fix emulation of H_SET_DABR/X on POWER8

On Fri, 20 Nov 2015 09:11:45 +0100 Thomas Huth wrote: > In the old DABR register, the BT (Breakpoint Translation) bit > is bit number 61. In the new DAWRX register, the WT (Watchpoint > Translation) bit is bit number 59. So to move the DABR-BT bit > into the position of the

Re: [PATCH] KVM: PPC: Fix emulation of H_SET_DABR/X on POWER8

On 20/11/2015 09:11, Thomas Huth wrote: > In the old DABR register, the BT (Breakpoint Translation) bit > is bit number 61. In the new DAWRX register, the WT (Watchpoint > Translation) bit is bit number 59. So to move the DABR-BT bit > into the position of the DAWRX-WT bit, it has to be shifted

Re: [PATCH 0/4] Preview: vcpu lookup by id changes

On 19/11/2015 09:37, Christian Borntraeger wrote: > > some more patches for review before I add them in my next pull request. > Can you review the common code changes and Ack/Nack? > > Alex, Paul, > can you review the power changes and Ack/Nack? > > As I want to have patch 2 in 4.4, I

Re: [PATCH 0/4] Preview: vcpu lookup by id changes

On 11/19/2015 10:38 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > > On 19/11/2015 09:37, Christian Borntraeger wrote: >> >> some more patches for review before I add them in my next pull request. >> Can you review the common code changes and Ack/Nack? >> >> Alex, Paul, >> can you review the power changes and

Re: [PATCH 0/4] Preview: vcpu lookup by id changes

On 19/11/2015 10:51, Christian Borntraeger wrote: > > I can apply patch 1 and 2 now to kvm/master. By the time kvm/next forks > > from Linus's tree (sometime next week, since kvm/queue is already > > largish) they will be in. > > I have 2or 3 more patches for 4.4 and I will prepare a pull

Re: [PATCH 2/4] KVM: s390: fix wrong lookup of VCPUs by array index

Sigh. Seems that my mail script got confused by the # after stable. So please strip down the cc list. On 11/19/2015 09:37 AM, Christian Borntraeger wrote: > From: David Hildenbrand > > For now, VCPUs were always created sequentially with incrementing > VCPU ids.

Re: [PATCH 1/4] KVM: Provide function for VCPU lookup by id

On 19/11/15 09:37, Christian Borntraeger wrote: > From: David Hildenbrand > > Let's provide a function to lookup a VCPU by id. > > Reviewed-by: Christian Borntraeger > Reviewed-by: Dominik Dingel > Signed-off-by:

Re: [PATCH 1/4] KVM: Provide function for VCPU lookup by id

> > Any chance that you name this function differently? Otherwise we've got > two functions that sound very similar and also have similar prototypes: > > - kvm_get_vcpu(struct kvm *kvm, int i) > - kvm_lookup_vcpu(struct kvm *kvm, int id) > > I'm pretty sure this will cause confusion in the

Re: [PATCH 1/4] KVM: Provide function for VCPU lookup by id

On 19/11/2015 13:55, David Hildenbrand wrote: >> > >> > I'm pretty sure this will cause confusion in the future! >> > ==> Could you maybe name the new function something like >> > "kvm_lookup_vcpu_by_id" or "kvm_get_vcpu_by_id" instead? > Had that in a previous version but decided to name it

Re: [PATCH 1/4] KVM: Provide function for VCPU lookup by id

On 11/19/2015 02:13 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > > On 19/11/2015 13:55, David Hildenbrand wrote: I'm pretty sure this will cause confusion in the future! ==> Could you maybe name the new function something like "kvm_lookup_vcpu_by_id" or "kvm_get_vcpu_by_id" instead? >> Had

Re: [PATCH 1/4] KVM: Provide function for VCPU lookup by id

> On 11/19/2015 02:13 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > > > > > On 19/11/2015 13:55, David Hildenbrand wrote: > > I'm pretty sure this will cause confusion in the future! > ==> Could you maybe name the new function something like > "kvm_lookup_vcpu_by_id" or "kvm_get_vcpu_by_id"

Re: [PATCH 0/7] kvmtool: Cleanup kernel loading

On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 10:29:30AM +, Andre Przywara wrote: > On 02/11/15 14:58, Will Deacon wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 06:26:53PM +, Andre Przywara wrote: > >> this series cleans up kvmtool's kernel loading functionality a bit. > >> It has been broken out of a previous series I

Re: [PATCH] KVM: powerpc: kvmppc_visible_gpa can be boolean

On 16/11/2015 04:10, Yaowei Bai wrote: > In another patch kvm_is_visible_gfn is maken return bool due to this > function only returns zero or one as its return value, let's also make > kvmppc_visible_gpa return bool to keep consistent. > > No functional change. > > Signed-off-by: Yaowei Bai

Re: [PATCH 0/7] kvmtool: Cleanup kernel loading

Hi Will, On 02/11/15 14:58, Will Deacon wrote: > On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 06:26:53PM +, Andre Przywara wrote: >> Hi, > > Hello Andre, > >> this series cleans up kvmtool's kernel loading functionality a bit. >> It has been broken out of a previous series I sent [1] and contains >> just the

Re: [PATCH] KVM: PPC: Exit guest upon fatal machine check exception

On Friday 13 November 2015 01:08 PM, Thomas Huth wrote: > On 13/11/15 07:26, Aravinda Prasad wrote: >> >> On Friday 13 November 2015 07:20 AM, David Gibson wrote: >>> On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 11:22:29PM +0530, Aravinda Prasad wrote: > [...] So thinking whether qemu should explicitly enable

Re: [PATCH] KVM: PPC: Exit guest upon fatal machine check exception

Aravinda Prasad writes: >> Yeah, it would be good not to break this. > > I am not familiar with CAPI. Does this affect CAPI? When a CAPI card experiences an EEH event, any cache lines it holds are filled with SUEs (Special UEs, interpreted by the kernel the same as

Re: [GIT PULL] Please pull my kvm-ppc-fixes branch

On 12/11/2015 06:35, Paul Mackerras wrote: > Paolo, > > I have two fixes for HV KVM which I would like to have included in > v4.4-rc1. The first one is a fix for a bug identified by Red Hat > which causes occasional guest crashes. The second one fixes a bug > which causes host stalls and

Re: [PATCH] KVM: PPC: Exit guest upon fatal machine check exception

On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 11:22:29PM +0530, Aravinda Prasad wrote: > > > On Thursday 12 November 2015 10:13 AM, David Gibson wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 10:02:10AM +0530, Aravinda Prasad wrote: > >> > >> > >> On Thursday 12 November 2015 09:08 AM, David Gibson wrote: > >>> On Thu, Nov 12,

Re: [PATCH] KVM: PPC: Exit guest upon fatal machine check exception

On Friday 13 November 2015 07:20 AM, David Gibson wrote: > On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 11:22:29PM +0530, Aravinda Prasad wrote: [...] >> >> I overlooked it. I think I need to take into consideration whether guest >> issued "ibm, nmi-register". If the guest has issued "ibm, nmi-register" >> then we

Re: [PATCH] KVM: PPC: Exit guest upon fatal machine check exception

On 13/11/15 07:26, Aravinda Prasad wrote: > > On Friday 13 November 2015 07:20 AM, David Gibson wrote: >> On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 11:22:29PM +0530, Aravinda Prasad wrote: [...] >>> So thinking whether qemu should explicitly enable the new NMI >>> behavior. >> >> So, I think the reasoning above

Re: [PATCH] KVM: PPC: Exit guest upon fatal machine check exception

On Friday 13 November 2015 03:07 AM, Daniel Axtens wrote: > Aravinda Prasad writes: > >>> Yeah, it would be good not to break this. >> >> I am not familiar with CAPI. Does this affect CAPI? > > When a CAPI card experiences an EEH event, any cache lines it holds

Re: [PATCH] KVM: PPC: Exit guest upon fatal machine check exception

On Thursday 12 November 2015 10:13 AM, David Gibson wrote: > On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 10:02:10AM +0530, Aravinda Prasad wrote: >> >> >> On Thursday 12 November 2015 09:08 AM, David Gibson wrote: >>> On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 01:24:19PM +1100, Daniel Axtens wrote: Aravinda Prasad

Re: [PATCH] KVM: PPC: Exit guest upon fatal machine check exception

On Thursday 12 November 2015 10:28 AM, Daniel Axtens wrote: > >> So, IIUC. Once the qemu pieces are in place as well it shouldn't >> change this behaviour: KVM will exit to qemu, qemu will log the error >> information (new), then reinject the MC to the guest which can still >> handle it as you

Re: [PATCH] KVM: PPC: Exit guest upon fatal machine check exception

> So, IIUC. Once the qemu pieces are in place as well it shouldn't > change this behaviour: KVM will exit to qemu, qemu will log the error > information (new), then reinject the MC to the guest which can still > handle it as you describe above. Ah, that makes *much* more sense now! Thanks for

Re: [PATCH] KVM: PPC: Exit guest upon fatal machine check exception

On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 10:02:10AM +0530, Aravinda Prasad wrote: > > > On Thursday 12 November 2015 09:08 AM, David Gibson wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 01:24:19PM +1100, Daniel Axtens wrote: > >> Aravinda Prasad writes: > >> > >>> This patch modifies KVM to

Re: [PATCH] KVM: PPC: Exit guest upon fatal machine check exception

On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 10:28:46PM +0530, Aravinda Prasad wrote: > This patch modifies KVM to cause a guest exit with > KVM_EXIT_NMI instead of immediately delivering a 0x200 > interrupt to guest upon machine check exception in > guest address. Exiting the guest enables QEMU to build > error log

Re: [PATCH] KVM: PPC: Exit guest upon fatal machine check exception

On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 01:24:19PM +1100, Daniel Axtens wrote: > Aravinda Prasad writes: > > > This patch modifies KVM to cause a guest exit with > > KVM_EXIT_NMI instead of immediately delivering a 0x200 > > interrupt to guest upon machine check exception in > >

Re: [PATCH] KVM: PPC: Exit guest upon fatal machine check exception

Aravinda Prasad writes: > This patch modifies KVM to cause a guest exit with > KVM_EXIT_NMI instead of immediately delivering a 0x200 > interrupt to guest upon machine check exception in > guest address. Exiting the guest enables QEMU to build > error log and deliver

Re: [PATCH] KVM: PPC: Exit guest upon fatal machine check exception

On Thursday 12 November 2015 09:04 AM, David Gibson wrote: > On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 10:28:46PM +0530, Aravinda Prasad wrote: >> This patch modifies KVM to cause a guest exit with >> KVM_EXIT_NMI instead of immediately delivering a 0x200 >> interrupt to guest upon machine check exception in >>

Re: [PATCH] KVM: PPC: Exit guest upon fatal machine check exception

On Thursday 12 November 2015 09:08 AM, David Gibson wrote: > On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 01:24:19PM +1100, Daniel Axtens wrote: >> Aravinda Prasad writes: >> >>> This patch modifies KVM to cause a guest exit with >>> KVM_EXIT_NMI instead of immediately delivering a

Re: [kvm-unit-tests PATCH 00/14] ppc64: initial drop

On 03/11/2015 08:08, Thomas Huth wrote: > On 03/08/15 16:41, Andrew Jones wrote: >> > This series is the first series of a series of series that will >> > bring support to kvm-unit-tests for ppc64, and eventually ppc64le. > Hi Andrew, > > may I ask about the current state of ppc64 support in

Re: [PATCH] KVM: PPC: Book3S HV: Synthesize segment fault if SLB lookup fails

On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 04:13:56PM +1100, Paul Mackerras wrote: > When handling a hypervisor data or instruction storage interrupt (HDSI > or HISI), we look up the SLB entry for the address being accessed in > order to translate the effective address to a virtual address which can > be looked up

Re: [kvm-unit-tests PATCH 00/14] ppc64: initial drop

On Tue, Nov 03, 2015 at 10:40:18AM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > > On 03/11/2015 08:08, Thomas Huth wrote: > > On 03/08/15 16:41, Andrew Jones wrote: > >> > This series is the first series of a series of series that will > >> > bring support to kvm-unit-tests for ppc64, and eventually ppc64le.

Re: [PATCH 0/7] kvmtool: Cleanup kernel loading

On 2 November 2015 at 14:58, Will Deacon wrote: > On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 06:26:53PM +, Andre Przywara wrote: >> Hi, > > Hello Andre, > >> this series cleans up kvmtool's kernel loading functionality a bit. >> It has been broken out of a previous series I sent [1] and

Re: [PATCH 0/7] kvmtool: Cleanup kernel loading

On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 06:26:53PM +, Andre Przywara wrote: > Hi, Hello Andre, > this series cleans up kvmtool's kernel loading functionality a bit. > It has been broken out of a previous series I sent [1] and contains > just the cleanup and bug fix parts, which should be less controversial

Re: [kvm-unit-tests PATCH 00/14] ppc64: initial drop

On 03/08/15 16:41, Andrew Jones wrote: > This series is the first series of a series of series that will > bring support to kvm-unit-tests for ppc64, and eventually ppc64le. Hi Andrew, may I ask about the current state of ppc64 support in the kvm-unit-tests? Is there a newer version available

Re: [PATCH 0/7] kvmtool: Cleanup kernel loading

Hi Dimitri, On 02/11/15 15:17, Dimitri John Ledkov wrote: > On 2 November 2015 at 14:58, Will Deacon wrote: >> On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 06:26:53PM +, Andre Przywara wrote: >>> Hi, >> >> Hello Andre, >> >>> this series cleans up kvmtool's kernel loading functionality a

Re: [PATCH] KVM: PPC: Book3S HV: Synthesize segment fault if SLB lookup fails

On 27/10/15 06:13, Paul Mackerras wrote: > When handling a hypervisor data or instruction storage interrupt (HDSI > or HISI), we look up the SLB entry for the address being accessed in > order to translate the effective address to a virtual address which can > be looked up in the guest HPT. This

Re: [GIT PULL] Please pull my kvm-ppc-next branch

On 26/10/2015 05:17, Paul Mackerras wrote: > Paolo, > > Here is my current patch queue for KVM on PPC. There's nothing much > in the way of new features this time; it's mostly bug fixes, plus > Nikunj has implemented support for KVM_CAP_NR_MEMSLOTS. These are > intended for the "next" branch of

Re: [PATCH] KVM: PPC: Implement extension to report number of memslots

On 26/10/15 06:15, Paul Mackerras wrote: > On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 08:41:31AM +0200, Thomas Huth wrote: >> Yes, we'll likely need this soon! 32 slots are not enough... > > Would anyone object if I raised the limit for PPC to 512 slots? In the long run we should really make this somehow

Re: [PATCH] KVM: PPC: Implement extension to report number of memslots

On Mon, 2015-10-26 at 16:15 +1100, Paul Mackerras wrote: > On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 08:41:31AM +0200, Thomas Huth wrote: > > Yes, we'll likely need this soon! 32 slots are not enough... > > Would anyone object if I raised the limit for PPC to 512 slots? > Would that cause problems on embedded PPC,

Re: [PATCH] KVM: PPC: Implement extension to report number of memslots

On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 08:41:31AM +0200, Thomas Huth wrote: > Yes, we'll likely need this soon! 32 slots are not enough... Would anyone object if I raised the limit for PPC to 512 slots? Would that cause problems on embedded PPC, for instance? Paul. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the

Fwd: Re: [PATCH v3 2/4] KVM: use simple waitqueue for vcpu->wq

Hi kvm-ppc folks, there is a remark for you in here... Message ID is 20151020140031.gg17...@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net Thanks, Paolo Forwarded Message Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/4] KVM: use simple waitqueue for vcpu->wq Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2015 16:00:31 +0200 From: Pe

Re: [PATCH] KVM: PPC: Implement extension to report number of memslots

On 16/10/15 06:57, Nikunj A Dadhania wrote: > QEMU assumes 32 memslots if this extension is not implemented. Although, > current value of KVM_USER_MEM_SLOTS is 32, once KVM_USER_MEM_SLOTS > changes QEMU would take a wrong value. > > Signed-off-by: Nikunj A Dadhania >

Re: [PATCH] KVM: PPC: e500: fix couple of shift operations on 64 bits

On Thu, Oct 01, 2015 at 03:58:03PM +0300, Laurentiu Tudor wrote: > Fix couple of cases where we shift left a 32-bit > value thus might get truncated results on 64-bit > targets. > > Signed-off-by: Laurentiu Tudor > Suggested-by: Scott Wood

Re: [PATCH][v2] KVM: PPC: e500: Emulate TMCFG0 TMRN register

On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 06:02:23PM +0300, Laurentiu Tudor wrote: > Emulate TMCFG0 TMRN register exposing one HW thread per vcpu. > > Signed-off-by: Mihai Caraman > [laurentiu.tu...@freescale.com: rebased on latest kernel, use > define instead of hardcoded value,

Re: [PATCH] powerpc/e6500: add TMCFG0 register definition

On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 06:06:22PM +0300, Laurentiu Tudor wrote: > The register is not currently used in the base kernel > but will be in a forthcoming kvm patch. > > Signed-off-by: Laurentiu Tudor Thanks, applied to my kvm-ppc-next branch. Paul. -- To

Re: [PATCH] KVM: PPC: e500: fix couple of shift operations on 64 bits

On Thu, 2015-10-01 at 15:58 +0300, Laurentiu Tudor wrote: > Fix couple of cases where we shift left a 32-bit > value thus might get truncated results on 64-bit > targets. > > Signed-off-by: Laurentiu Tudor > Suggested-by: Scott Wood > ---

Re: [PATCH 1/2] KVM: PPC: e6500: Handle LRAT error exception

On 09/30/2015 01:32 PM, Laurentiu Tudor wrote: > On 09/25/2015 03:10 AM, Scott Wood wrote: >> On Thu, 2015-09-24 at 16:11 +0300, Laurentiu Tudor wrote: [snip] >>> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kvm/e500_mmu_host.c >>> b/arch/powerpc/kvm/e500_mmu_host.c >>> index 12d5c67..99ad88a 100644 >>> ---

Re: [PATCH 1/2] KVM: PPC: e6500: Handle LRAT error exception

On 09/30/2015 01:32 PM, Laurentiu Tudor wrote: > On 09/25/2015 03:10 AM, Scott Wood wrote: >> On Thu, 2015-09-24 at 16:11 +0300, Laurentiu Tudor wrote: [snip] >>> b/arch/powerpc/kvm/e500_mmu_host.c >>> index 12d5c67..99ad88a 100644 >>> --- a/arch/powerpc/kvm/e500_mmu_host.c >>> +++

Re: [PATCH 1/2] KVM: PPC: e6500: Handle LRAT error exception

On 09/25/2015 03:10 AM, Scott Wood wrote: > On Thu, 2015-09-24 at 16:11 +0300, Laurentiu Tudor wrote: >> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kvm/bookehv_interrupts.S >> b/arch/powerpc/kvm/bookehv_interrupts.S >> index 81bd8a07..1e9fa2a 100644 >> --- a/arch/powerpc/kvm/bookehv_interrupts.S >> +++

Re: [PATCH 1/2] KVM: PPC: e6500: Handle LRAT error exception

On Wed, 2015-09-30 at 14:27 +0300, Laurentiu Tudor wrote: > On 09/30/2015 01:32 PM, Laurentiu Tudor wrote: > > On 09/25/2015 03:10 AM, Scott Wood wrote: > > > On Thu, 2015-09-24 at 16:11 +0300, Laurentiu Tudor wrote: > > [snip] > > > > > b/arch/powerpc/kvm/e500_mmu_host.c > > > > index

Re: [PATCH][v2] KVM: PPC: e500: Emulate TMCFG0 TMRN register

On Fri, 2015-09-25 at 18:02 +0300, Laurentiu Tudor wrote: > Emulate TMCFG0 TMRN register exposing one HW thread per vcpu. > > Signed-off-by: Mihai Caraman > [laurentiu.tu...@freescale.com: rebased on latest kernel, use > define instead of hardcoded value, moved code

Re: [PATCH] KVM: PPC: e6500: support powers of 2K TLB1 sizes

On Fri, 2015-09-25 at 17:30 +0300, Laurentiu Tudor wrote: > On 09/24/2015 11:23 PM, Scott Wood wrote: > > On Thu, 2015-09-24 at 15:57 +0300, Laurentiu Tudor wrote: > > > Book-E MMUv2 present in e6500 cores supports > > > powers of 2K page sizes while older MMUv1 cores > > > support only powers of

Re: [PATCH] KVM: PPC: e6500: support powers of 2K TLB1 sizes

On Thu, 2015-09-24 at 15:57 +0300, Laurentiu Tudor wrote: > Book-E MMUv2 present in e6500 cores supports > powers of 2K page sizes while older MMUv1 cores > support only powers of 4K page sizes, or in other > words the LSB of TSIZE on MMUv1 is always 0. > Thus, on MMUv2 we must not strip the LSB.

Re: [PATCH] KVM: PPC: e500: Emulate TMCFG0 TMRN register

On Thu, 2015-09-24 at 09:56 +0300, Laurentiu Tudor wrote: > Emulate TMCFG0 TMRN register exposing one HW thread per vcpu. > > Signed-off-by: Mihai Caraman > [laurentiu.tu...@freescale.com: rebased on latest kernel, > use define instead of hardcoded value] >

Re: [PATCH] powerpc/e6500: add TMCFG0 register definition

On Wed, 2015-09-23 at 18:06 +0300, Laurentiu Tudor wrote: > The register is not currently used in the base kernel > but will be in a forthcoming kvm patch. > > Signed-off-by: Laurentiu Tudor > --- > arch/powerpc/include/asm/reg_booke.h | 6 ++ > 1 file

Re: [PATCH 15/19] KVM: PPC: e500: fix handling local_sid_lookup result

On Thu, 2015-09-24 at 16:00 +0200, Andrzej Hajda wrote: > The function can return negative value. > > The problem has been detected using proposed semantic patch > scripts/coccinelle/tests/assign_signed_to_unsigned.cocci [1]. > > [1]: http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/2046107 > >

Re: [PATCH 1/2] KVM: PPC: e6500: Handle LRAT error exception

On Thu, 2015-09-24 at 16:11 +0300, Laurentiu Tudor wrote: > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kvm/bookehv_interrupts.S > b/arch/powerpc/kvm/bookehv_interrupts.S > index 81bd8a07..1e9fa2a 100644 > --- a/arch/powerpc/kvm/bookehv_interrupts.S > +++ b/arch/powerpc/kvm/bookehv_interrupts.S > @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@

Re: [PATCH 0/2] VFIO: Accept IOMMU group (PE) ID

On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 11:42:28AM +1000, David Gibson wrote: >On Sat, Sep 19, 2015 at 04:22:47PM +1000, David Gibson wrote: >> On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 09:47:32AM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote: >> > On Fri, 2015-09-18 at 16:24 +1000, Gavin Shan wrote: >> > > This allows to accept IOMMU group (PE)

Re: [PATCH v4] ppc/spapr: Implement H_RANDOM hypercall in QEMU

On 21/09/15 04:10, David Gibson wrote: > On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 11:05:52AM +0200, Greg Kurz wrote: >> On Thu, 17 Sep 2015 10:49:41 +0200 >> Thomas Huth wrote: >> >>> The PAPR interface defines a hypercall to pass high-quality >>> hardware generated random numbers to guests.

Re: [PATCH v4] ppc/spapr: Implement H_RANDOM hypercall in QEMU

On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 12:10:00 +1000 David Gibson wrote: > On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 11:05:52AM +0200, Greg Kurz wrote: > > On Thu, 17 Sep 2015 10:49:41 +0200 > > Thomas Huth wrote: > > > > > The PAPR interface defines a hypercall to pass high-quality

Re: [PATCH] KVM: PPC: Take the kvm->srcu lock in kvmppc_h_logical_ci_load/store()

On 21/09/15 03:37, David Gibson wrote: > On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 08:57:28AM +0200, Thomas Huth wrote: >> Access to the kvm->buses (like with the kvm_io_bus_read() and -write() >> functions) has to be protected via the kvm->srcu lock. >> The kvmppc_h_logical_ci_load() and -store() functions are

Re: [PATCH] KVM: PPC: Take the kvm->srcu lock in kvmppc_h_logical_ci_load/store()

On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 07:50:22AM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > > On 21/09/2015 03:37, David Gibson wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 08:57:28AM +0200, Thomas Huth wrote: > >> Access to the kvm->buses (like with the kvm_io_bus_read() and > >> -write() functions) has to be protected via the

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v4] ppc/spapr: Implement H_RANDOM hypercall in QEMU

On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 10:37:28AM +0200, Greg Kurz wrote: > On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 10:26:52 +0200 > Thomas Huth wrote: > > > On 21/09/15 10:01, Greg Kurz wrote: > > > On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 12:10:00 +1000 > > > David Gibson wrote: > > > > > >> On Fri,

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >