On 10.02.14 06:12, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
On 02/08/2014 01:06 AM, Alexander Graf wrote:
On 07.02.2014, at 14:44, Greg Kurz gk...@linux.vnet.ibm.com wrote:
In the past, IO space could not be mapped into the memory address space
so we introduced a workaround for that. Nowadays it does not
On 02/08/2014 01:06 AM, Alexander Graf wrote:
On 07.02.2014, at 14:44, Greg Kurz gk...@linux.vnet.ibm.com wrote:
In the past, IO space could not be mapped into the memory address space
so we introduced a workaround for that. Nowadays it does not look
necessary so we can remove the
In the past, IO space could not be mapped into the memory address space
so we introduced a workaround for that. Nowadays it does not look
necessary so we can remove the workaround and make sPAPR PCI
configuration simplier.
Signed-off-by: Greg Kurz gk...@linux.vnet.ibm.com
---
There has been a
On 07.02.2014, at 14:44, Greg Kurz gk...@linux.vnet.ibm.com wrote:
In the past, IO space could not be mapped into the memory address space
so we introduced a workaround for that. Nowadays it does not look
necessary so we can remove the workaround and make sPAPR PCI
configuration simplier.
On Fri, 03 Jan 2014 09:08:21 +1100
Alexey Kardashevskiy a...@ozlabs.ru wrote:
Please read the rest of this thread. It does not visibly break things but
with this patch QEMU starts calling unassigned_mem_accepts() (normally
silent) which is not a good sign.
Hmm... this is only because
On 01/06/2014 10:12 PM, Greg Kurz wrote:
On Fri, 03 Jan 2014 09:08:21 +1100
Alexey Kardashevskiy a...@ozlabs.ru wrote:
Please read the rest of this thread. It does not visibly break things but
with this patch QEMU starts calling unassigned_mem_accepts() (normally
silent) which is not a good
On 11.12.2013, at 07:47, Alexey Kardashevskiy a...@ozlabs.ru wrote:
On 12/10/2013 06:47 PM, Greg Kurz wrote:
On Tue, 10 Dec 2013 13:43:05 +1100
Alexey Kardashevskiy a...@ozlabs.ru wrote:
On 12/10/2013 03:33 AM, Greg Kurz wrote:
In the past, IO space could not be mapped into the memory
On 01/03/2014 08:04 AM, Alexander Graf wrote:
On 11.12.2013, at 07:47, Alexey Kardashevskiy a...@ozlabs.ru wrote:
On 12/10/2013 06:47 PM, Greg Kurz wrote:
On Tue, 10 Dec 2013 13:43:05 +1100
Alexey Kardashevskiy a...@ozlabs.ru wrote:
On 12/10/2013 03:33 AM, Greg Kurz wrote:
In the past,
On 02.01.2014, at 23:08, Alexey Kardashevskiy a...@ozlabs.ru wrote:
On 01/03/2014 08:04 AM, Alexander Graf wrote:
On 11.12.2013, at 07:47, Alexey Kardashevskiy a...@ozlabs.ru wrote:
On 12/10/2013 06:47 PM, Greg Kurz wrote:
On Tue, 10 Dec 2013 13:43:05 +1100
Alexey Kardashevskiy
On 03.01.2014 9:09, Alexander Graf wrote:
On 02.01.2014, at 23:08, Alexey Kardashevskiy a...@ozlabs.ru wrote:
On 01/03/2014 08:04 AM, Alexander Graf wrote:
On 11.12.2013, at 07:47, Alexey Kardashevskiy a...@ozlabs.ru wrote:
On 12/10/2013 06:47 PM, Greg Kurz wrote:
On Tue, 10 Dec 2013
On 12/17/2013 06:52 PM, Greg Kurz wrote:
On Wed, 11 Dec 2013 18:07:58 +1100
Alexey Kardashevskiy a...@ozlabs.ru wrote:
Hm. Nack. This fails:
./qemu-system-ppc64 \
-trace events=qemu_trace_events \
-L qemu-ppc64-bios/ \
-nographic \
-vga none \
-device \
On Wed, 11 Dec 2013 18:07:58 +1100
Alexey Kardashevskiy a...@ozlabs.ru wrote:
Hm. Nack. This fails:
./qemu-system-ppc64 \
-trace events=qemu_trace_events \
-L qemu-ppc64-bios/ \
-nographic \
-vga none \
-device \
On 12/10/2013 06:47 PM, Greg Kurz wrote:
On Tue, 10 Dec 2013 13:43:05 +1100
Alexey Kardashevskiy a...@ozlabs.ru wrote:
On 12/10/2013 03:33 AM, Greg Kurz wrote:
In the past, IO space could not be mapped into the memory address space
so we introduced a workaround for that. Nowadays it does not
On 12/11/2013 05:47 PM, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
On 12/10/2013 06:47 PM, Greg Kurz wrote:
On Tue, 10 Dec 2013 13:43:05 +1100
Alexey Kardashevskiy a...@ozlabs.ru wrote:
On 12/10/2013 03:33 AM, Greg Kurz wrote:
In the past, IO space could not be mapped into the memory address space
so we
In the past, IO space could not be mapped into the memory address space
so we introduced a workaround for that. Nowadays it does not look
necessary so we can remove the workaround and make sPAPR PCI
configuration simplier.
This workaround has also an evil side effect with virtio devices: because
On 12/10/2013 03:33 AM, Greg Kurz wrote:
In the past, IO space could not be mapped into the memory address space
so we introduced a workaround for that. Nowadays it does not look
necessary so we can remove the workaround and make sPAPR PCI
configuration simplier.
This workaround has also an
On Tue, 10 Dec 2013 13:43:05 +1100
Alexey Kardashevskiy a...@ozlabs.ru wrote:
On 12/10/2013 03:33 AM, Greg Kurz wrote:
In the past, IO space could not be mapped into the memory address space
so we introduced a workaround for that. Nowadays it does not look
necessary so we can remove the
Il 16/07/2013 07:19, Alexey Kardashevskiy ha scritto:
In the past, IO space could not be mapped into the memory address space
so we introduced a workaround for that. Nowadays it does not look
necessary so we can remove the workaround and make sPAPR PCI
configuration simplier.
This also
Am 16.07.2013 um 08:20 schrieb Paolo Bonzini pbonz...@redhat.com:
Il 16/07/2013 07:19, Alexey Kardashevskiy ha scritto:
In the past, IO space could not be mapped into the memory address space
so we introduced a workaround for that. Nowadays it does not look
necessary so we can remove the
On 07/16/2013 06:32 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
Am 16.07.2013 um 08:20 schrieb Paolo Bonzini pbonz...@redhat.com:
Il 16/07/2013 07:19, Alexey Kardashevskiy ha scritto:
In the past, IO space could not be mapped into the memory address space
so we introduced a workaround for that. Nowadays
Am 16.07.2013 um 10:37 schrieb Alexey Kardashevskiy a...@ozlabs.ru:
On 07/16/2013 06:32 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
Am 16.07.2013 um 08:20 schrieb Paolo Bonzini pbonz...@redhat.com:
Il 16/07/2013 07:19, Alexey Kardashevskiy ha scritto:
In the past, IO space could not be mapped into the
On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 10:32 +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
Did I miss anything here?
No, I don't think so. The patch looks good.
... and will break all Mac targets again, no? Not to speak of non-ppc
devices.
Do you know why it breaks ? Can you suggest what's wrong and how to fix
it
Am 16.07.2013 um 10:45 schrieb Benjamin Herrenschmidt
b...@kernel.crashing.org:
On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 10:32 +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
Did I miss anything here?
No, I don't think so. The patch looks good.
... and will break all Mac targets again, no? Not to speak of non-ppc
On 07/16/2013 07:01 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
Am 16.07.2013 um 10:45 schrieb Benjamin Herrenschmidt
b...@kernel.crashing.org:
On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 10:32 +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
Did I miss anything here?
No, I don't think so. The patch looks good.
... and will break all Mac
On 15.07.2013, at 05:24, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
As it looks like all portio users have migrated to new portio api,
the workaround with memory access to io ports routing is no more
needed.
This also fixes a bug with byte swapping as the io region was marked
as little endian while it
On 07/15/2013 04:06 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
On 15.07.2013, at 05:24, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
As it looks like all portio users have migrated to new portio api,
the workaround with memory access to io ports routing is no more
needed.
This also fixes a bug with byte swapping as the
In the past, IO space could not be mapped into the memory address space
so we introduced a workaround for that. Nowadays it does not look
necessary so we can remove the workaround and make sPAPR PCI
configuration simplier.
This also removes all byte swappings as it is not PHB's to take care
of
As it looks like all portio users have migrated to new portio api,
the workaround with memory access to io ports routing is no more
needed.
This also fixes a bug with byte swapping as the io region was marked
as little endian while it should not do any swapping at all.
Signed-off-by: Alexey
28 matches
Mail list logo
