Hi all,
On Tue, 2 Jun 2020 14:53:58 +1000 Stephen Rothwell
wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the kvm tree got a conflict in:
>
> arch/x86/kernel/kvm.c
>
> between commit:
>
> a707ae1a9bbb ("x86/entry: Switch page fault exception to IDTENTRY_RAW")
>
> from the tip tree a
On 19/12/18 22:28, Dave Hansen wrote:
>
> On 12/19/18 1:00 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> On 19/12/18 21:54, Dave Hansen wrote:
>>> I should have called this out in the changelog, but I removed *all* the
>>> support because I assumed that guests don't need MPX because no other OS
>>> supported it tha
On 12/19/18 1:00 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 19/12/18 21:54, Dave Hansen wrote:
>> I should have called this out in the changelog, but I removed *all* the
>> support because I assumed that guests don't need MPX because no other OS
>> supported it that I know of.
>
> Well, as long as you could
On 19/12/18 21:54, Dave Hansen wrote:
> I should have called this out in the changelog, but I removed *all* the
> support because I assumed that guests don't need MPX because no other OS
> supported it that I know of.
Well, as long as you could have code that sets the MPX bits in XCR0, KVM
will ha
On 12/19/18 12:32 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 19/12/18 05:12, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>> I fixed it up (the former removed some code updated by the latter, so I
>> did that) and can carry the fix as necessary. This is now fixed as far as
>> linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial conflicts s
On 19/12/18 05:12, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the kvm tree got a conflict in:
>
> arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
>
> between commit:
>
> eb012ef3b4e3 ("x86: Remove Intel MPX")
>
> from the tip tree and commit:
>
> b666a4b69739 ("kvm: x86: Dynamically allocate
Hi all,
On Wed, 8 Aug 2018 13:54:45 +1000 Stephen Rothwell
wrote:
>
> Paolo pointed out a semantic conflict between the kvm tree and the tip
> tree in
>
> arch/x86/kernel/kvm.c
>
> between commit:
>
> 368a540e0232 ("x86/kvmclock: Remove memblock dependency")
>
> from the tip tree and com
Hi Stephen:
Thanks for fix. I will discuss with maintainer about how to deal with
the issue.
On 8/6/2018 1:12 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the kvm tree got a conflict in:
>
>arch/x86/include/asm/trace/hyperv.h
>
> between commit:
>
>58e
Hi all,
On Mon, 28 Aug 2017 14:52:09 +1000 Stephen Rothwell
wrote:
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the kvm tree got a conflict in:
>
> arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c
>
> between commit:
>
> ea2800ddb20d ("kvm/x86: Avoid clearing the C-bit in rsvd_bits()")
>
> from the tip tree and commit:
>
> d63
* Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 25/08/2017 22:41, Brijesh Singh wrote:
>
> >
> >> Neither my version nor yours is correct. :) The right one has [0][i]
> >> and [1][i] (I inverted the indices by mistake).
> >>
> >> With that change, you can include my
> >>
> >> Acked-by: Paolo Bonzini
> >>
>
On 25/08/2017 22:41, Brijesh Singh wrote:
>
>> Neither my version nor yours is correct. :) The right one has [0][i]
>> and [1][i] (I inverted the indices by mistake).
>>
>> With that change, you can include my
>>
>> Acked-by: Paolo Bonzini
>>
>
> Ingo,
>
> I assuming that this patch shoul
On 08/25/2017 03:05 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
On 25/08/2017 18:53, Brijesh Singh wrote:
Neither my version nor yours is correct. :) The right one has [0][i]
and [1][i] (I inverted the indices by mistake).
With that change, you can include my
Acked-by: Paolo Bonzini
Ingo,
I assuming
On 25/08/2017 18:53, Brijesh Singh wrote:
>>
>
> Thanks for the tip, I have expanded the patch to cover tdp cases and
> have verified
> that it works fine with SME enabled KVM. If you are okay with this then
> I can
> send patch.
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c
> index cc
Hi Paolo,
On 08/25/2017 08:57 AM, Tom Lendacky wrote:
On 8/25/2017 1:39 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
On 25/08/2017 06:39, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
First, rsvd_bits is just a simple function to return some 1 bits. Applying
a mask based on properties of the host MMU is incorrect.
Second, the mas
On 8/25/2017 1:39 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
On 25/08/2017 06:39, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the kvm tree got a conflict in:
arch/x86/kvm/mmu.h
between commit:
d0ec49d4de90 ("kvm/x86/svm: Support Secure Memory Encryption within KVM")
from the tip tree an
On 25/08/2017 06:39, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the kvm tree got a conflict in:
>
> arch/x86/kvm/mmu.h
>
> between commit:
>
> d0ec49d4de90 ("kvm/x86/svm: Support Secure Memory Encryption within KVM")
>
> from the tip tree and commit:
>
> d1cd3ce90
Hi Thomas,
On Thu, 17 Nov 2016 08:07:27 +0100 (CET) Thomas Gleixner
wrote:
>
> On Thu, 17 Nov 2016, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > + /* Please keep the leaf sorted by cpuid_bit.level for faster search. */
> > + static const struct cpuid_bit cpuid_bits[] = {
> > + { X86_FEATURE_APERFMPERF, C
On Thu, 17 Nov 2016, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> + /* Please keep the leaf sorted by cpuid_bit.level for faster search. */
> + static const struct cpuid_bit cpuid_bits[] = {
> + { X86_FEATURE_APERFMPERF, CPUID_ECX, 0, 0x0006, 0 },
> + { X86_FEATURE_EPB, CPUID_ECX, 3,
18 matches
Mail list logo
