c
@@ -815,7 +815,8 @@ static struct platform_driver uml_net_driver = {
static void vector_device_release(struct device *dev)
{
- struct vector_device *device = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
+ struct vector_device *device =
+ container_of(dev, struct vector_device, pdev.dev);
t ubd *ubd_dev = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
+ struct ubd *ubd_dev = container_of(dev, struct ubd, pdev.dev);
blk_mq_free_tag_set(&ubd_dev->tag_set);
*ubd_dev = ((struct ubd) DEFAULT_UBD);
Acked-By: Anton Ivanov
--
Anton R. Ivanov
Cambridgegreys Limited. Registered in England. Company Number 10273661
https://www.cambridgegreys.com/
*error_out)
if (err)
goto out_cleanup_disk;
+ ubd_dev->disk = disk;
+
return 0;
out_cleanup_disk:
Acked-By: Anton Ivanov
--
Anton R. Ivanov
Cambridgegreys Limited. Registered in England. Company Number 10273661
https://www.cambridgegreys.com/
336,7 @@ static struct platform_driver uml_net_driver = {
static void net_device_release(struct device *dev)
{
- struct uml_net *device = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
+ struct uml_net *device = container_of(dev, struct uml_net, pdev.dev);
struct net_device *netdev = device->dev
ruct vector_fds *uml_vector_user_open(
return user_init_unix_fds(parsed, ID_BESS);
if (strncmp(transport, TRANS_FD, TRANS_FD_LEN) == 0)
return user_init_fd_fds(parsed);
+ if (strncmp(transport, TRANS_VDE, TRANS_VDE_LEN) == 0)
+ return user_init_vde_fds(parsed);
return NULL;
}
Acked-By: Anton Ivanov
--
Anton R. Ivanov
https://www.kot-begemot.co.uk/
From: Anton Ivanov
Fix the handling of NAPI budget.
Signed-off-by: Anton Ivanov
---
arch/um/drivers/vector_kern.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/um/drivers/vector_kern.c b/arch/um/drivers/vector_kern.c
index 53e825bcc6fa..5e96efef65cf 100644
--- a
From: Anton Ivanov
Fix the handling of NAPI budget.
Signed-off-by: Anton Ivanov
---
arch/um/drivers/vector_kern.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/arch/um/drivers/vector_kern.c b/arch/um/drivers/vector_kern.c
index 53e825bcc6fa..18fb167e7bd8 100644
--- a
From: Anton Ivanov
UML vector drivers use ring buffer structures which map
preallocated skbs onto mmsg vectors for use with sendmmsg
and recvmmsg. They are designed around a single consumer,
single producer pattern allowing simultaneous enqueue and
dequeue.
Lock debugging with preemption showed
On 04/07/2024 23:55, Johannes Berg wrote:
On Thu, 2024-07-04 at 21:16 +0100, Anton Ivanov wrote:
- qi->queue_depth = 0;
+ wmb(); /* Ensure that RX processing elsewhere sees the changes */
+ atomic_set(&qi->queue_depth, 0);
}
I don't understand this.
pr
On 04/07/2024 17:12, Johannes Berg wrote:
On Thu, 2024-07-04 at 13:22 +0100, anton.iva...@cambridgegreys.com
wrote:
@@ -675,11 +657,20 @@ static void prep_queue_for_rx(struct vector_queue *qi)
struct vector_private *vp = netdev_priv(qi->dev);
struct mmsghdr *mmsg_vector = qi->mms
From: Anton Ivanov
UML vector drivers use ring buffer structures which map
preallocated skbs onto mmsg vectors for use with sendmmsg
and recvmmsg. They are designed around a single consumer,
single producer pattern allowing simultaneous enqueue and
dequeue.
Lock debugging with preemption showed
On 04/07/2024 10:55, Johannes Berg wrote:
On Thu, 2024-07-04 at 10:52 +0100, Anton Ivanov wrote:
There is an extra issue there - stats. I need to double-check the locking when
they are being fetched.
Same story - these need atomics. Otherwise we can potentially get the same ABBA
lock
On 04/07/2024 10:45, Anton Ivanov wrote:
On 04/07/2024 10:17, Johannes Berg wrote:
Hi Anton,
Thanks for taking a look! Also thanks for the other explanation.
On Thu, 2024-07-04 at 08:21 +0100, anton.iva...@cambridgegreys.com
wrote:
From: Anton Ivanov
UML vector drivers use ring buffer
On 04/07/2024 10:21, Johannes Berg wrote:
On Thu, 2024-07-04 at 07:58 +0100, Anton Ivanov wrote:
+__initcall(register_power_off);
Anton Ivanov
Heh, I thought I saw an Acked-by from you but then patchwork didn't seem
to pick it up, I guess I'll treat it as one anyway? :)
Yes.
On 04/07/2024 10:17, Johannes Berg wrote:
Hi Anton,
Thanks for taking a look! Also thanks for the other explanation.
On Thu, 2024-07-04 at 08:21 +0100, anton.iva...@cambridgegreys.com
wrote:
From: Anton Ivanov
UML vector drivers use ring buffer structures which map
preallocated skbs onto
From: Anton Ivanov
UML vector drivers use ring buffer structures which map
preallocated skbs onto mmsg vectors for use with sendmmsg
and recvmmsg. They are designed around a single consumer,
single producer pattern allowing simultaneous enqueue and
dequeue.
Lock debugging with preemption showed
return 0;
@@ -1157,7 +1159,6 @@ static int vector_net_close(struct net_device *dev)
destroy_queue(vp->tx_queue);
kfree(vp->fds);
vp->fds = NULL;
- vp->opened = false;
vp->in_error = false;
return 0;
}
Acked-By: Anton Iva
or_kern.h
index 2a1fa8e0f3e1..806df551be0b 100644
--- a/arch/um/drivers/vector_kern.h
+++ b/arch/um/drivers/vector_kern.h
@@ -71,7 +71,6 @@ struct vector_estats {
struct vector_private {
struct list_head list;
- spinlock_t lock;
struct net_device *dev;
struct napi_struct napicacheline_aligned;
Acked-By: Anton Ivanov
--
Anton R. Ivanov
https://www.kot-begemot.co.uk/
;
+}
+__initcall(register_power_off);
Anton Ivanov
--
Anton R. Ivanov
https://www.kot-begemot.co.uk/
up_one_line(struct line *lines, int n, char *init,
}
}
if (err) {
+ *error_out = "failed to parse channel pair";
line->init_str = NULL;
line->valid = 0;
| ~ 500Mbit |
Acked-By: Anton Ivanov
--
Anton R. Ivanov
https://www.kot-begemot.co.uk/
On 03/07/2024 17:26, Johannes Berg wrote:
Lockdep reports a spinlock ordering problem: sometimes we take head_lock
first, sometimes tail_lock, so there's a classic ABBA deadlock possible.
It may not happen now because of UML being single-CPU and all that, but
perhaps with preempt?
You need both
On 02/07/2024 11:18, Johannes Berg wrote:
On Tue, 2024-07-02 at 11:07 +0100, Anton Ivanov wrote:
Is that all we have left?
I think so, yes.
I lost track of your mm patches and they do not apply cleanly to master at
present.
Mine actually mostly went away, in favour of Benjamin&#
On 02/07/2024 09:25, Johannes Berg wrote:
From: Anton Ivanov
Since userspace state is saved in the MM process, kernel using
FPU still doesn't really need to do anything, so this really
is as simple as enabling preemption. The irq critical section
in sigio_handler() needs preempt_di
On 01/07/2024 17:35, Johannes Berg wrote:
On Mon, 2024-07-01 at 17:56 +0200, Johannes Berg wrote:
Hmm. I also see a ton of this:
BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at
kernel/locking/rwsem.c:1525
in_atomic(): 1, irqs_disabled(): 1, non_block: 0, pid: 538, name: chan-switch.sh
pr
On 01/07/2024 20:09, Johannes Berg wrote:
On Mon, 2024-07-01 at 19:55 +0100, Anton Ivanov wrote:
As Benjamin pointed out we no longer need this, so we can junk this
patch at this point. If there will be any need to save/restore FPU in
kernel context, I will revisit it.
I think we still want
amp;& len != -EAGAIN)
+ pr_err("spurious interrupt in %s, err = %d\n", __func__, len);
return IRQ_HANDLED;
}
Acked-By: Anton Ivanov
--
Anton R. Ivanov
Cambridgegreys Limited. Registered in England. Company Number 10273661
https://www.cambridgegreys.com/
lk_queue_max_write_zeroes_sectors(io_req->req->q, 0);
}
blk_mq_end_request(io_req->req, io_req->error);
kfree(io_req);
Acked-By: Anton Ivanov
--
Anton R. Ivanov
Cambridgegreys Limited. Registered in England. Company Number 10273661
https://www.cambridgegreys.com/
On 22/04/2024 08:22, Benjamin Berg wrote:
On Mon, 2024-04-22 at 10:51 +0800, Tiwei Bie wrote:
On 4/18/24 5:23 PM, benja...@sipsolutions.net wrote:
diff --git a/arch/um/include/asm/mmu.h b/arch/um/include/asm/mmu.h
index 37eb6e89e79a..bf8da736609c 100644
--- a/arch/um/include/asm/mmu.h
+++ b/
On 19/04/2024 14:47, Benjamin Berg wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, 2024-04-03 at 07:27 +0100, anton.iva...@cambridgegreys.com
wrote:
From: Anton Ivanov
1. Preemption requires saving/restoring FPU state. This patch
adds support for it using GCC intrinsics as well as appropriate
storage space in the thread
From: Anton Ivanov
1. Preemption requires saving/restoring FPU state. This patch
adds support for it using GCC intrinsics as well as appropriate
storage space in the thread structure. We reuse the space
which is already allocated for the userspace threads in the
thread_info structure.
2. irq
On 01/04/2024 12:04, Tiwei Bie wrote:
On 3/29/24 3:50 AM, anton.iva...@cambridgegreys.com wrote:
[...]
+
+void kernel_fpu_begin(void)
+{
+ preempt_disable();
+
+ WARN_ON(this_cpu_read(in_kernel_fpu));
+
+ this_cpu_write(in_kernel_fpu, true);
+
+#ifdef CONFIG_64BIT
+ if (l
From: Anton Ivanov
1. Preemption requires saving/restoring FPU state. This patch
adds support for it using GCC intrinsics as well as appropriate
storage space in the thread structure. We reuse the space
which is already allocated for the userspace threads in the
thread_info structure.
2. irq
On 28/03/2024 09:27, Johannes Berg wrote:
@@ -23,7 +23,7 @@ struct thread_info {
int preempt_count; /* 0 => preemptable,
<0 => BUG */
struct thread_info *real_thread;/* Points to non-IRQ stack */
From: Anton Ivanov
Remove the pcap driver in UML. It is obsolete. It does not build on
recent systems due to changes in libpcap and its dependencies.
The vector driver's raw transport in UML provides identical
functionality.
Signed-off-by: Anton Ivanov
---
arch/um/drivers/Kconfig
On 20/03/2024 14:09, Richard Weinberger wrote:
- Ursprüngliche Mail -
Von: "Petr Tesarik"
Yes. I'm just way behind my maintainer schedule. :-/
Understood. Thank you for your reply.
By the way, are you looking for more people to help with the amount of work?
Yes, help is always
On 07/03/2024 10:29, Johannes Berg wrote:
On Thu, 2024-03-07 at 10:27 +, Anton Ivanov wrote:
How's that required to be formatted and loaded? tcpdump itself can also
dump the filter in BPF format, with -d/-ddd (-dd is a C representation,
so probably not useful). Perhaps we could
On 07/03/2024 10:03, Johannes Berg wrote:
On Thu, 2024-03-07 at 09:54 +, Anton Ivanov wrote:
PCAP is not feasible to incorporate into the build system at present.
It has grown all kinds of warts over the years and brings a lot of dependencies.
IMHO we should remove it from the tree. It
On 06/03/2024 16:14, Waqar Hameed wrote:
On Tue, Mar 05, 2024 at 23:11 +0800 kernel test robot wrote:
Hi Vincent,
FYI, the error/warning still remains.
tree: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git
master
head: 90d35da658da8cff0d4ecbb5113f5fac9d00eb72
commi
On 17/01/2024 17:17, Benjamin Berg wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, 2023-09-27 at 11:52 +0200, Benjamin Berg wrote:
[SNIP]
Once we are there, we can look for optimizations. The fundamental
problem is that page faults (even minor ones) are extremely expensive
for us.
Just throwing out ideas on what we could
On 05/01/2024 08:42, Johannes Berg wrote:
On Thu, 2024-01-04 at 22:05 +0100, Richard Weinberger wrote:
On Fri, Oct 6, 2023 at 2:28 PM Ma Ke wrote:
In vector_legacy_rx, to avoid an unexpected result returned by
pskb_trim, we should check the return value of pskb_trim().
Signed-off-by: Ma Ke
ic netdev_tx_t uml_net_start_xmit(struct sk_buff *skb, struct net_device
*dev)
{
struct uml_net_private *lp = netdev_priv(dev);
unsigned long flags;
---
base-commit: 8a749fd1a8720d4619c91c8b6e7528c0a355c0aa
change-id: 20231003-um-net-wifpts-14a7429c7524
Best regards,
--
Natha
On 04/12/2023 12:06, Benjamin Beichler wrote:
Am 01.12.2023 um 19:35 schrieb Johannes Berg:
[I guess we should keep the CCs so other see it]
Looking at the stuck check it will be bogus in simulations.
True.
You might as well ifdef that instead.
If a simulation is running insert the ent
On 01/12/2023 10:21, Johannes Berg wrote:
Hi,
In ARCH=um, we have a mode where we simulate clocks completely, and even
simulate that the CPU is infinitely fast. Thus, reading the clock will
return completely predictable values regardless of the work happening.
This is clearly incompatible wi
On 10/11/2023 18:52, Johannes Berg wrote:
From: Johannes Berg
For the upcoming shared-memory time-travel external
optimisations, we need to be able to mmap/mremap
(and on error munmap). Add the necessary OS calls.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Berg
---
arch/um/include/shared/os.h | 3 +++
arch/
On 10/11/2023 11:10, Benjamin Berg wrote:
Hi,
On Fri, 2023-11-10 at 10:56 +, Anton Ivanov wrote:
On 10/11/2023 10:42, Anton Ivanov wrote:
[SNIP]
If we are going to use this definition of CATCH_EINTR throughout we
might as well remove the partial read/write code in UBD and other
places
On 10/11/2023 10:42, Anton Ivanov wrote:
On 10/11/2023 09:44, benja...@sipsolutions.net wrote:
From: Benjamin Berg
The UM kernel uses signals for various purposes (SIGALRM for scheduling
for example). These signals are interrupts for the UM kernel, which
should not affect file system
On 10/11/2023 09:44, benja...@sipsolutions.net wrote:
From: Benjamin Berg
The UM kernel uses signals for various purposes (SIGALRM for scheduling
for example). These signals are interrupts for the UM kernel, which
should not affect file system operations from userspace processes.
Said diffe
On 04/11/2023 09:25, Nadav Amit wrote:
I was reading (again) the x86 C macro of “alternative()” and I was a bit
surprised it does clobber the flags (“cc”) as a precaution.
#define alternative(oldinstr, newinstr, ft_flags) \
asm_inline volatile (ALTERNATIVE(oldinstr, newinstr, ft_flags
strstr(line, x86_cap_flags[i])
&&
+ !(time_travel_mode != TT_MODE_OFF && strstr("tsc",
x86_cap_flags[i])))
set_cpu_cap(&boot_cpu_data, i);
}
}
Acked-by: Anton Ivanov
--
Anton R. Ivanov
Cambridgegreys Limited. Registered in Engl
On 20/10/2023 10:15, Benjamin Beichler wrote:
Am 18.10.2023 um 14:36 schrieb benja...@sipsolutions.net:
From: Benjamin Berg
When in time-travel mode, the eventfd events are read even when signals
are blocked as SIGIO still needs to be processed. In this case, the
event is cleared on the eve
From: Anton Ivanov
arch_futex_atomic_op_inuser was not documented correctly
resulting in build time warnings.
Signed-off-by: Anton Ivanov
---
arch/um/kernel/skas/uaccess.c | 4 +++-
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/arch/um/kernel/skas/uaccess.c b/arch/um/kernel
On 07/10/2023 01:51, Ma Ke wrote:
In vector_mmsg_rx, to avoid an unexpected result returned by
pskb_trim, we should check the return value of pskb_trim().
Signed-off-by: Ma Ke
---
arch/um/drivers/vector_kern.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/um/dr
On 28/09/2023 10:10, anton.iva...@cambridgegreys.com wrote:
From: Anton Ivanov
1. Preemption requires saving/restoring FPU state. This patch
adds support for it using GCC intrinsics as well as appropriate
storage space in the thread structure. We reuse the space
which is already allocated
From: Anton Ivanov
1. Preemption requires saving/restoring FPU state. This patch
adds support for it using GCC intrinsics as well as appropriate
storage space in the thread structure. We reuse the space
which is already allocated for the userspace threads in the
thread_info structure.
2. irq
On 27/09/2023 10:52, Benjamin Berg wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, 2023-09-26 at 14:38 +0200, Johannes Berg wrote:
[SNIP]
1. Start from scratch, without copying, which my other patch [1] did.
I really think we should go ahead with that approach. Then follow up
with optimizations.
+1
[SNIP]
I thin
On 26/09/2023 13:38, Johannes Berg wrote:
On Tue, 2023-09-26 at 13:16 +0100, Anton Ivanov wrote:
For the time being it is mostly negative :)
Oh well :)
1. The performance after the mm patch is down. By 30-40% on my standard bench.
For the record, you mean this three-patch series that
On 25/09/2023 16:20, Anton Ivanov wrote:
On 25/09/2023 15:44, Johannes Berg wrote:
On Mon, 2023-09-25 at 15:27 +0100, Anton Ivanov wrote:
On 25/09/2023 14:33, Johannes Berg wrote:
On Mon, 2023-09-25 at 14:29 +0100, Anton Ivanov wrote:
I have rebased the preempt patch on top of these
On 25/09/2023 15:44, Johannes Berg wrote:
On Mon, 2023-09-25 at 15:27 +0100, Anton Ivanov wrote:
On 25/09/2023 14:33, Johannes Berg wrote:
On Mon, 2023-09-25 at 14:29 +0100, Anton Ivanov wrote:
I have rebased the preempt patch on top of these series.
PREEMPT works with some performance
On 25/09/2023 14:33, Johannes Berg wrote:
On Mon, 2023-09-25 at 14:29 +0100, Anton Ivanov wrote:
I have rebased the preempt patch on top of these series.
PREEMPT works with some performance decrease.
VOLUNTARY deadlocks early in boot around the time it starts loading modules.
non
On 25/09/2023 14:33, Johannes Berg wrote:
On Mon, 2023-09-25 at 14:29 +0100, Anton Ivanov wrote:
I have rebased the preempt patch on top of these series.
PREEMPT works with some performance decrease.
VOLUNTARY deadlocks early in boot around the time it starts loading modules.
non
I have rebased the preempt patch on top of these series.
PREEMPT works with some performance decrease.
VOLUNTARY deadlocks early in boot around the time it starts loading modules.
non-preemptible deadlocks very early in boot.
I am going to investigate and come back with a revised PREEMPT patch
On 22/09/2023 21:12, Johannes Berg wrote:
On Fri, 2023-09-22 at 21:08 +0100, Anton Ivanov wrote:
On 22/09/2023 20:41, Johannes Berg wrote:
On Fri, 2023-09-22 at 14:41 +0100, Anton Ivanov wrote:
It is nearly twice slower than the current approach on a find /usr -type f -exec
cat {} > /
On 22/09/2023 21:12, Johannes Berg wrote:
On Fri, 2023-09-22 at 21:08 +0100, Anton Ivanov wrote:
On 22/09/2023 20:41, Johannes Berg wrote:
On Fri, 2023-09-22 at 14:41 +0100, Anton Ivanov wrote:
It is nearly twice slower than the current approach on a find /usr -type f -exec
cat {} > /
On 22/09/2023 20:41, Johannes Berg wrote:
On Fri, 2023-09-22 at 14:41 +0100, Anton Ivanov wrote:
It is nearly twice slower than the current approach on a find /usr -type f -exec
cat {} > /dev/null \;
Btw, I cannot reproduce that at all - seems about the same in my tests?
Is there anyth
On 22/09/2023 16:31, Benjamin Berg wrote:
Hi,
On Fri, 2023-09-22 at 14:41 +0100, Anton Ivanov wrote:
On 22/09/2023 12:16, Johannes Berg wrote:
From: Johannes Berg
While enabling PREEMPT on UML, we found that the call to
force_flush_all() cannot be done where it is, it sleeps
while atomic
On 22/09/2023 12:16, Johannes Berg wrote:
From: Johannes Berg
While enabling PREEMPT on UML, we found that the call to
force_flush_all() cannot be done where it is, it sleeps
while atomic.
Further investigation shows that all this seems at least
a bit roundabout and possibly wrong wrong in t
On 22/09/2023 12:22, Johannes Berg wrote:
4. UML TLB flush is also invoked during a fork. This happens
with interrupts and preempt disabled which disagrees with the
standard mm locking via rwsem. The mm lock for this code path
had to be replaced with an rcu.
For the record, even if I figure
On 22/09/2023 11:56, anton.iva...@cambridgegreys.com wrote:
From: Anton Ivanov
1. Preemption requires saving/restoring FPU state. This patch
adds support for it using GCC intrinsics as well as appropriate
storage space in the thread structure.
2. irq critical sections need preempt_disable
From: Anton Ivanov
1. Preemption requires saving/restoring FPU state. This patch
adds support for it using GCC intrinsics as well as appropriate
storage space in the thread structure.
2. irq critical sections need preempt_disable()/preempt_enable().
3. TLB critical sections need
On 22/09/2023 10:55, Johannes Berg wrote:
On Fri, 2023-09-22 at 11:51 +0200, Johannes Berg wrote:
On Fri, 2023-09-22 at 10:19 +0100, Anton Ivanov wrote:
So maybe that works - perhaps with a big comment?
Ack. Will add this to the patch and run it through its paces.
We can also just get rid
On 22/09/2023 10:14, Johannes Berg wrote:
On Fri, 2023-09-22 at 11:10 +0200, Johannes Berg wrote:
On Fri, 2023-09-22 at 10:06 +0100, Anton Ivanov wrote:
On 22/09/2023 09:41, Johannes Berg wrote:
Yes, but when does the fork actually happen?
Looking further at this, now I'm confused
On 22/09/2023 10:04, Johannes Berg wrote:
On Fri, 2023-09-22 at 10:43 +0200, Johannes Berg wrote:
I think this has pretty much always been wrong, just now we actually
notice it?
Basically, when we create a new thread (really just mm I think), we say
the first thing that has to run there is for
On 22/09/2023 09:41, Johannes Berg wrote:
Yes, but when does the fork actually happen?
Looking further at this, now I'm confused as to why it doesn't happen
_all_ the time.
I think this has pretty much always been wrong, just now we actually
notice it?
Basically, when we create a new thread
On 22/09/2023 09:13, Johannes Berg wrote:
On Fri, 2023-09-22 at 09:01 +0100, Anton Ivanov wrote:
My favorite test which I run on all changes is:
find /usr -type f -exec cat {} > /dev/null \;
On Debian this forks /bin/cat for each file and does IO on it. That test passes
here every t
On 22/09/2023 08:40, Johannes Berg wrote:
On Fri, 2023-09-22 at 08:38 +0100, Anton Ivanov wrote:
I had enabled CONFIG_DEBUG_ATOMIC_SLEEP because that's actually
something I'd really like to have in our testing.
But with that issue I don't even know how we get there really.
On 22/09/2023 08:30, Johannes Berg wrote:
On Fri, 2023-09-22 at 07:52 +0100, anton.iva...@cambridgegreys.com
wrote:
+++ b/arch/um/include/asm/processor-generic.h
@@ -44,6 +44,9 @@ struct thread_struct {
} cb;
} u;
} request;
+#if defined(CONFIG_P
On 22/09/2023 08:27, Richard Weinberger wrote:
- Ursprüngliche Mail -
Von: "anton ivanov"
An: "linux-um"
CC: "Johannes Berg" , "richard" , "anton
ivanov"
Gesendet: Freitag, 22. September 2023 08:52:12
Betreff: [PATCH v5] um: Enable
From: Anton Ivanov
Preemption requires saving/restoring FPU state. This patch
adds support for it using GCC intrinsics.
Signed-off-by: Anton Ivanov
---
arch/um/Kconfig | 1 -
arch/um/include/asm/fpu/api.h | 9 ++-
arch/um/include/asm/processor-generic.h
On 21/09/2023 22:55, Richard Weinberger wrote:
- Ursprüngliche Mail -
Von: "anton ivanov"
An: "richard"
CC: "linux-um" , "Johannes Berg"
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 21. September 2023 23:41:16
Betreff: Re: [PATCH v4] um: Enable preemption in UML
On 21/09/2023 22:02, Richard Weinberger wrote:
- Ursprüngliche Mail -
Von: "anton ivanov"
An: "linux-um"
CC: "Johannes Berg" , "richard" , "anton
ivanov"
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 21. September 2023 17:55:22
Betreff: [PATCH v
On 21/09/2023 16:32, anton.iva...@cambridgegreys.com wrote:
From: Anton Ivanov
Preemption requires saving/restoring FPU state. This patch
adds support for it using GCC intrinsics.
Signed-off-by: Anton Ivanov
---
arch/um/Kconfig | 1 -
arch/um/include/asm/fpu
On 21/09/2023 16:55, anton.iva...@cambridgegreys.com wrote:
From: Anton Ivanov
Preemption requires saving/restoring FPU state. This patch
adds support for it using GCC intrinsics.
Signed-off-by: Anton Ivanov
---
arch/um/Kconfig | 1 -
arch/um/include/asm/fpu
From: Anton Ivanov
Preemption requires saving/restoring FPU state. This patch
adds support for it using GCC intrinsics.
Signed-off-by: Anton Ivanov
---
arch/um/Kconfig | 1 -
arch/um/include/asm/fpu/api.h | 9 ++-
arch/um/include/asm/processor-generic.h
On 21/09/2023 16:42, Peter Lafreniere wrote:
On Thu, Sep 21, 2023 at 11:32, anton.iva...@cambridgegreys.com wrote:
From: Anton Ivanov anton.iva...@cambridgegreys.com
Preemption requires saving/restoring FPU state. This patch
adds support for it using GCC intrinsics.
Signed-off-by: Anton
From: Anton Ivanov
Preemption requires saving/restoring FPU state. This patch
adds support for it using GCC intrinsics.
Signed-off-by: Anton Ivanov
---
arch/um/Kconfig | 1 -
arch/um/include/asm/fpu/api.h | 6 +-
arch/um/include/asm/processor-generic.h | 3
From: Anton Ivanov
__cant_sleep was already used and exported by the scheduler.
The name had to be changed to a UML specific one.
Signed-off-by: Anton Ivanov
---
arch/um/include/shared/kern_util.h | 2 +-
arch/um/kernel/process.c | 2 +-
arch/um/os-Linux/helper.c | 6
On 21/09/2023 14:46, Peter Lafreniere wrote:
On Thu, Sep 21, 2023 at 05:28, anton.iva...@cambridgegreys.com wrote:
From: Anton Ivanov anton.iva...@cambridgegreys.com
Preemption requires saving/restoring FPU state. This patch
adds support for it using GCC intrinsics.
Signed-off-by: Anton
On 21/09/2023 14:46, Peter Lafreniere wrote:
On Thu, Sep 21, 2023 at 05:28, anton.iva...@cambridgegreys.com wrote:
From: Anton Ivanov anton.iva...@cambridgegreys.com
Preemption requires saving/restoring FPU state. This patch
adds support for it using GCC intrinsics.
Signed-off-by: Anton
On 21/09/2023 10:42, Anton Ivanov wrote:
On 21/09/2023 10:35, Johannes Berg wrote:
Hi,
Haven't chimed in here before, but thanks for looking at this! I
actually really wanted at least the things you get for debug from this
in the past, so much appreciated.
I think I actually tr
On 21/09/2023 10:35, Johannes Berg wrote:
Hi,
Haven't chimed in here before, but thanks for looking at this! I
actually really wanted at least the things you get for debug from this
in the past, so much appreciated.
I think I actually tried a simpler approach and it kind of even worked,
but
On 21/09/2023 10:28, anton.iva...@cambridgegreys.com wrote:
From: Anton Ivanov
Preemption requires saving/restoring FPU state. This patch
adds support for it using GCC intrinsics.
Marginally slower than before
3m 03s for find /usr -type f -exec cat {} > /dev/null \;
Still, better t
From: Anton Ivanov
Preemption requires saving/restoring FPU state. This patch
adds support for it using GCC intrinsics.
Signed-off-by: Anton Ivanov
---
arch/um/Kconfig | 1 -
arch/um/Makefile| 3 +-
arch/um/include/asm/fpu/api.h | 4
On 21/09/2023 08:30, Richard Weinberger wrote:
- Ursprüngliche Mail -
Von: "anton ivanov"
An: "Peter Lafreniere"
CC: "Johannes Berg" , "linux-um" ,
"richard"
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 21. September 2023 09:12:33
Betreff: Re: [PATCH
On 20/09/2023 15:49, Peter Lafreniere wrote:
On Wed, Sep 20, 2023 at 08:31, anton.iva...@cambridgegreys.com wrote:
From: Anton Ivanov anton.iva...@cambridgegreys.com
Preemption requires saving/restoring FPU state. This patch
adds support for it using GCC intrinsics.
Signed-off-by: Anton
On 20/09/2023 13:30, Anton Ivanov wrote:
On 20/09/2023 12:14, Anton Ivanov wrote:
Added support for kernel side fpu store/restore and real
kernel_fpu_begin/kernel_fpu_end using gcc intrinsics. Enabled PREEMPT.
It boots and seems to be alive and kicking. I do not notice any
significant
On 20/09/2023 16:04, Peter Lafreniere wrote:
On Wed, Sep 20, 2023 at 08:31, anton.iva...@cambridgegreys.com wrote:
From: Anton Ivanov anton.iva...@cambridgegreys.com
Preemption requires saving/restoring FPU state. This patch
adds support for it using GCC intrinsics.
Signed-off-by: Anton
On 20/09/2023 15:49, Peter Lafreniere wrote:
On Wed, Sep 20, 2023 at 08:31, anton.iva...@cambridgegreys.com wrote:
From: Anton Ivanov anton.iva...@cambridgegreys.com
Preemption requires saving/restoring FPU state. This patch
adds support for it using GCC intrinsics.
Signed-off-by: Anton
On 19/09/2023 15:16, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 03:48:09PM +0200, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
On Tue, 2023-09-19 at 15:42 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
The agreement to kill off ia64 wasn't an invitation to kill off other stuff
that people are still working on! Can we
On 20/09/2023 13:30, Anton Ivanov wrote:
On 20/09/2023 12:14, Anton Ivanov wrote:
Added support for kernel side fpu store/restore and real
kernel_fpu_begin/kernel_fpu_end using gcc intrinsics. Enabled PREEMPT.
It boots and seems to be alive and kicking. I do not notice any significant
1 - 100 of 132 matches
Mail list logo
