Re: [Xen-devel] xenbits "official" repo for XTF (was Re: [PATCH 0/2] xtf: add launcher (+1 bugfix)

On 07/07/16 14:59, Ian Jackson wrote: > Andrew Cooper writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] xenbits "official" repo for XTF (was > Re: [PATCH 0/2] xtf: add launcher (+1 bugfix)"): >> On 07/07/16 12:10, Lars Kurth wrote: >>> @Andrew: would something like test/xtf.git work > I would live with that. > >> It

Re: [Xen-devel] xenbits "official" repo for XTF (was Re: [PATCH 0/2] xtf: add launcher (+1 bugfix)

On 07/07/16 14:59, Ian Jackson wrote: > Andrew Cooper writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] xenbits "official" repo for XTF (was > Re: [PATCH 0/2] xtf: add launcher (+1 bugfix)"): >> On 07/07/16 12:10, Lars Kurth wrote: >>> @Andrew: would something like test/xtf.git work > > I would live with that. > >> It

Re: [Xen-devel] xenbits "official" repo for XTF (was Re: [PATCH 0/2] xtf: add launcher (+1 bugfix)

Andrew Cooper writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] xenbits "official" repo for XTF (was Re: [PATCH 0/2] xtf: add launcher (+1 bugfix)"): > On 07/07/16 12:10, Lars Kurth wrote: > > @Andrew: would something like test/xtf.git work I would live with that. > It would, although given a straight choice I would

[Xen-devel] [PATCH] XSM/policy: Allow the source domain access to settime and setdomainhandle domctls while creating domain.

From: Anshul Makkar This patch resolves the following permission denied scenarios while creating new domU : avc: denied { setdomainhandle } for domid=0 target=1 scontext=system_u:system_r:dom0_t tcontext=system_u:system_r:domU_t tclass=domain avc: denied { settime

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen: arm64: Add support for Renesas RCar Gen3 H3 Salvator-X platform

On Thu, Jul 07, 2016 at 02:14:53PM +0100, Julien Grall wrote: > > > On 07/07/16 13:43, Lars Kurth wrote: > > > >>On 7 Jul 2016, at 12:28, Wei Liu wrote: > >> > >>Also CC Lars. > >> > >>On Mon, Jul 04, 2016 at 12:12:52PM +0100, Julien Grall wrote: > >>>(CC Wei for the

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/2] xenbus: don't bail early from xenbus_dev_request_and_reply()

>>> On 07.07.16 at 15:22, wrote: > On 07/07/16 14:13, David Vrabel wrote: >> On 07/07/16 13:23, Jan Beulich wrote: >> On 07.07.16 at 14:17, wrote: On 07/07/16 13:09, Jan Beulich wrote: On 07.07.16 at 13:36,

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen: arm64: Add support for Renesas RCar Gen3 H3 Salvator-X platform

On Thu, 7 Jul 2016, Andrew Cooper wrote: > On 07/07/16 14:17, Lars Kurth wrote: > >> On 7 Jul 2016, at 14:14, Julien Grall wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >> On 07/07/16 13:43, Lars Kurth wrote: > On 7 Jul 2016, at 12:28, Wei Liu wrote: > > Also

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/2] xenbus: don't bail early from xenbus_dev_request_and_reply()

On 07/07/16 14:13, David Vrabel wrote: > On 07/07/16 13:23, Jan Beulich wrote: > On 07.07.16 at 14:17, wrote: >>> On 07/07/16 13:09, Jan Beulich wrote: >>> On 07.07.16 at 13:36, wrote: > On 07/07/16 08:32, Jan Beulich wrote: >> We

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen: arm64: Add support for Renesas RCar Gen3 H3 Salvator-X platform

On 07/07/16 14:17, Lars Kurth wrote: >> On 7 Jul 2016, at 14:14, Julien Grall wrote: >> >> >> >> On 07/07/16 13:43, Lars Kurth wrote: On 7 Jul 2016, at 12:28, Wei Liu wrote: Also CC Lars. On Mon, Jul 04, 2016 at 12:12:52PM

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen: arm64: Add support for Renesas RCar Gen3 H3 Salvator-X platform

> On 7 Jul 2016, at 14:14, Julien Grall wrote: > > > > On 07/07/16 13:43, Lars Kurth wrote: >> >>> On 7 Jul 2016, at 12:28, Wei Liu wrote: >>> >>> Also CC Lars. >>> >>> On Mon, Jul 04, 2016 at 12:12:52PM +0100, Julien Grall wrote: (CC Wei

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen: arm64: Add support for Renesas RCar Gen3 H3 Salvator-X platform

On 07/07/16 13:43, Lars Kurth wrote: On 7 Jul 2016, at 12:28, Wei Liu wrote: Also CC Lars. On Mon, Jul 04, 2016 at 12:12:52PM +0100, Julien Grall wrote: (CC Wei for the release part) Hi Dirk, On 04/07/16 07:51, Dirk Behme wrote: Signed-off-by: Dirk Behme

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/2] xenbus: don't bail early from xenbus_dev_request_and_reply()

On 07/07/16 13:23, Jan Beulich wrote: On 07.07.16 at 14:17, wrote: >> On 07/07/16 13:09, Jan Beulich wrote: >> On 07.07.16 at 13:36, wrote: On 07/07/16 08:32, Jan Beulich wrote: > We must not skip the transaction_end() call for

Re: [Xen-devel] (no subject)

On 07/07/16 12:03, Dario Faggioli wrote: > On Thu, 2016-07-07 at 10:36 +0100, George Dunlap wrote: >> On Sat, Jun 18, 2016 at 12:12 AM, Dario Faggioli >> wrote: >>> >>> in both xenalyze and formats (for xentrace_format). >>> >>> In particular, in xenalyze, now that we

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen: arm64: Add support for Renesas RCar Gen3 H3 Salvator-X platform

> On 7 Jul 2016, at 12:28, Wei Liu wrote: > > Also CC Lars. > > On Mon, Jul 04, 2016 at 12:12:52PM +0100, Julien Grall wrote: >> (CC Wei for the release part) >> >> Hi Dirk, >> >> On 04/07/16 07:51, Dirk Behme wrote: >>> Signed-off-by: Dirk Behme

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xenbus: prefer list_for_each()

On 07/07/16 09:33, Jan Beulich wrote: > ... over list_for_each_safe() when list modification if accompanied by > breaking out of the loop. > > Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich Reviewed-by: Juergen Gross > --- > drivers/xen/xenbus/xenbus_dev_frontend.c |4

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen-scsiback: correct return value checks on xenbus_scanf()

On 07/07/16 10:01, Jan Beulich wrote: > Only a positive return value indicates success. > > Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich Acked-by: Juergen Gross > --- > drivers/xen/xen-scsiback.c |4 ++-- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > ---

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen-scsifront: correct return value checks on xenbus_scanf()

On 07/07/16 10:01, Jan Beulich wrote: > Only a positive return value indicates success. > > Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich Acked-by: Juergen Gross > --- > drivers/scsi/xen-scsifront.c |4 ++-- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > ---

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/2] xenbus: don't bail early from xenbus_dev_request_and_reply()

>>> On 07.07.16 at 14:17, wrote: > On 07/07/16 13:09, Jan Beulich wrote: > On 07.07.16 at 13:36, wrote: >>> On 07/07/16 08:32, Jan Beulich wrote: We must not skip the transaction_end() call for a failed XS_TRANSACTION_START. The

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen-tpmfront: correct return value check on xenbus_scanf()

On Thu, Jul 07, 2016 at 06:00:25AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote: > >>> On 07.07.16 at 12:38, wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 07, 2016 at 01:35:54PM +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > >> On Thu, Jul 07, 2016 at 02:04:00AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote: > >> > Only a positive return

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen-netback: correct return value checks on xenbus_scanf()

>>> On 07.07.16 at 12:55, wrote: >> -Original Message- >> From: netdev-ow...@vger.kernel.org [mailto:netdev- >> ow...@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of David Vrabel >> Sent: 07 July 2016 11:45 >> To: Wei Liu; David Vrabel >> Cc: xen-de...@lists.xenproject.org; Jan

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/2] xenbus: don't bail early from xenbus_dev_request_and_reply()

On 07/07/16 13:09, Jan Beulich wrote: On 07.07.16 at 13:36, wrote: >> On 07/07/16 08:32, Jan Beulich wrote: >>> We must not skip the transaction_end() call for a failed >>> XS_TRANSACTION_START. The removed code fragment got introduced by >>> commit 027bd7e899

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/2] xenbus: don't bail early from xenbus_dev_request_and_reply()

>>> On 07.07.16 at 13:36, wrote: > On 07/07/16 08:32, Jan Beulich wrote: >> We must not skip the transaction_end() call for a failed >> XS_TRANSACTION_START. The removed code fragment got introduced by >> commit 027bd7e899 ("xen/xenbus: Avoid synchronous wait on XenBus >>

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen-netfront: prefer xenbus_write() over xenbus_printf() where possible

>>> On 07.07.16 at 13:12, wrote: > The better clean-up is to remove xenbus_write() in favour of > xenbus_printf() everywhere (especially since one of your "cleanups" made > it worse). I don't think I've seen any reply indicating something has got made worse. The fact

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] tools/hotplug: Add native systemd xendriverdomain.service

On Sun, Jul 03, 2016 at 03:33:01AM +, Rusty Bird wrote: > Uses ConditionVirtualization=xen, which evaluates to false in dom0 since > systemd 214 (released 2014-06-11). An alternative would be this line: > ExecStartPre=/bin/sh -c "! grep -q control_d /proc/xen/capabilities" > > (Please rerun

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen-tpmfront: correct return value check on xenbus_scanf()

>>> On 07.07.16 at 12:38, wrote: > On Thu, Jul 07, 2016 at 01:35:54PM +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: >> On Thu, Jul 07, 2016 at 02:04:00AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote: >> > Only a positive return value indicates success. >> > >> > Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] tools/xl: Allow callers of `xl info` to select specific information

On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 05:40:23PM +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote: > When scripting, it is much more convenient to use: > > [root@fusebot ~]# xl info xen_version > 4.8-unstable > > than to construct some sed/awk/other to parse: > > [root@fusebot ~]# xl info > ... > xen_version

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 2/5] xen/console: allow log level threshold adjustments

>>> On 04.07.16 at 17:13, wrote: In case this (or a variant thereof) is to be used despite the earlier voiced concerns, a couple of mechanical comments: > +static const char *loglvl_to_str(int lvl) > +{ > +unsigned int i; > + > +if ( lvl < LOG_LEVEL_MIN || lvl >

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/2] xenbus: don't bail early from xenbus_dev_request_and_reply()

On 07/07/16 08:32, Jan Beulich wrote: > We must not skip the transaction_end() call for a failed > XS_TRANSACTION_START. The removed code fragment got introduced by > commit 027bd7e899 ("xen/xenbus: Avoid synchronous wait on XenBus > stalling shutdown/restart") without its description really

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen: arm64: Add support for Renesas RCar Gen3 H3 Salvator-X platform

Also CC Lars. On Mon, Jul 04, 2016 at 12:12:52PM +0100, Julien Grall wrote: > (CC Wei for the release part) > > Hi Dirk, > > On 04/07/16 07:51, Dirk Behme wrote: > >Signed-off-by: Dirk Behme > > Thank you for adding support of a new board in Xen. > > During the last

Re: [Xen-devel] xenbits "official" repo for XTF (was Re: [PATCH 0/2] xtf: add launcher (+1 bugfix)

On 07/07/16 12:10, Lars Kurth wrote: >> On 6 Jul 2016, at 15:22, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk >> wrote: >> >>> Looking at the above, it occurs to me that, this whole area seems to be a >>> little inconsistent anyway and could do with a little house-keeping. We >>> have >>> -

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xenbus: don't BUG() on user mode induced condition

On 07/07/16 08:23, Jan Beulich wrote: > Inability to locate a user mode specified transaction ID should not > lead to a kernel crash. For other than XS_TRANSACTION_START also > don't issue anything to xenbus if the specified ID doesn't match that > of any active transaction. Applied to

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen-netfront: prefer xenbus_write() over xenbus_printf() where possible

On 07/07/16 09:00, Jan Beulich wrote: > ... as being the simpler variant. It's really annoying that all these related cleanups where not in the same thread. Don't do this again, please. The better clean-up is to remove xenbus_write() in favour of xenbus_printf() everywhere (especially since one

Re: [Xen-devel] xenbits "official" repo for XTF (was Re: [PATCH 0/2] xtf: add launcher (+1 bugfix)

> On 6 Jul 2016, at 15:22, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: > >> Looking at the above, it occurs to me that, this whole area seems to be a >> little inconsistent anyway and could do with a little house-keeping. We >> have >> - osstest.git >> - there also is osstest/*.git

Re: [Xen-devel] (no subject)

On Thu, 2016-07-07 at 10:36 +0100, George Dunlap wrote: > On Sat, Jun 18, 2016 at 12:12 AM, Dario Faggioli > wrote: > > > > in both xenalyze and formats (for xentrace_format). > > > > In particular, in xenalyze, now that we have the precision > > of the fixed point

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 13/19] xen: credit2: make the code less experimental

On Mon, 2016-06-20 at 02:13 -0600, Jan Beulich wrote: > > > > On 18.06.16 at 01:12, wrote: > > @@ -680,8 +677,8 @@ __update_svc_load(const struct scheduler *ops, > >  delta = now - svc->load_last_update; > >  if ( unlikely(delta < 0) ) > >  { > >

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen-blkfront: avoid NULL de-reference in CDROM ioctl handling

On Thu, Jul 07, 2016 at 03:42:02AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote: > >>> On 07.07.16 at 11:32, wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 07, 2016 at 01:40:54AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote: > >> The ioctl can be called prior to full device setup having completed. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen-netback: correct return value checks on xenbus_scanf()

> -Original Message- > From: netdev-ow...@vger.kernel.org [mailto:netdev- > ow...@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of David Vrabel > Sent: 07 July 2016 11:45 > To: Wei Liu; David Vrabel > Cc: xen-de...@lists.xenproject.org; Jan Beulich; net...@vger.kernel.org > Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH]

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 07/19] xen: credit2: prevent load balancing to go mad if time goes backwards

On Thu, 2016-07-07 at 03:18 -0600, Jan Beulich wrote: > > > > On 07.07.16 at 11:09, wrote: > > > Oh, okay - I agree on those two parts then. But the question on > > > the > > > usefulness of absolute vs relative times remains. > > What is the usefulness of printing the

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2] xen: arm64: Add support for Renesas RCar Gen3 H3 Salvator-X platform

Hi Dirk, On 07/07/16 11:39, Dirk Behme wrote: On 06.07.2016 16:21, Julien Grall wrote: On 06/07/16 15:03, Dirk Behme wrote: On 06.07.2016 15:17, Julien Grall wrote: Hi Dirk, On 06/07/16 07:33, Dirk Behme wrote: Could you share the U-Boot commands how you load and esp. start Xen? For

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen-netback: correct return value checks on xenbus_scanf()

On 07/07/16 11:35, Wei Liu wrote: > On Thu, Jul 07, 2016 at 10:58:16AM +0100, David Vrabel wrote: >> On 07/07/16 08:57, Jan Beulich wrote: >>> Only a positive return value indicates success. >> >> This is not correct. >> > > Do you mean the commit message is not correct or the code is not >

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen-netback: correct return value checks on xenbus_scanf()

> -Original Message- > From: Paul Durrant > Sent: 07 July 2016 11:41 > To: Wei Liu; David Vrabel > Cc: Jan Beulich; Wei Liu; xen-de...@lists.xenproject.org; > net...@vger.kernel.org > Subject: RE: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen-netback: correct return value checks > on xenbus_scanf() > > >

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen-blkback: prefer xenbus_write() over xenbus_printf() where possible

On 07/07/16 11:26, David Vrabel wrote: > On 07/07/16 09:06, Jan Beulich wrote: >> ... as being the simpler variant. > [...] >> --- 4.7-rc6-prefer-xenbus_write.orig/drivers/block/xen-blkback/xenbus.c >> +++ 4.7-rc6-prefer-xenbus_write/drivers/block/xen-blkback/xenbus.c >> @@ -617,9 +617,9 @@ static

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen-netback: correct return value checks on xenbus_scanf()

> -Original Message- > From: netdev-ow...@vger.kernel.org [mailto:netdev- > ow...@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Wei Liu > Sent: 07 July 2016 11:35 > To: David Vrabel > Cc: Jan Beulich; Wei Liu; xen-de...@lists.xenproject.org; > net...@vger.kernel.org > Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH]

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2] xen: arm64: Add support for Renesas RCar Gen3 H3 Salvator-X platform

Hi Julien, On 06.07.2016 16:21, Julien Grall wrote: On 06/07/16 15:03, Dirk Behme wrote: On 06.07.2016 15:17, Julien Grall wrote: Hi Dirk, On 06/07/16 07:33, Dirk Behme wrote: Could you share the U-Boot commands how you load and esp. start Xen? For loading you use TFTP? How do you start

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen-tpmfront: correct return value check on xenbus_scanf()

On Thu, Jul 07, 2016 at 02:04:00AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote: > Only a positive return value indicates success. > > Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich Reviewed-by: Jarkko Sakkinen /Jarkko > --- > drivers/char/tpm/xen-tpmfront.c |2 +- > 1 file

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 1/5] xen/console: consolidate log levels to an array

>>> On 04.07.16 at 17:13, wrote: > --- a/xen/drivers/char/console.c > +++ b/xen/drivers/char/console.c > @@ -139,6 +139,20 @@ custom_param("guest_loglvl", parse_guest_loglvl); > > static atomic_t print_everything = ATOMIC_INIT(0); > > +struct log_level { > +const

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen-tpmfront: correct return value check on xenbus_scanf()

On Thu, Jul 07, 2016 at 01:35:54PM +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > On Thu, Jul 07, 2016 at 02:04:00AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote: > > Only a positive return value indicates success. > > > > Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich > > Reviewed-by: Jarkko Sakkinen

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen-netback: correct return value checks on xenbus_scanf()

On Thu, Jul 07, 2016 at 10:58:16AM +0100, David Vrabel wrote: > On 07/07/16 08:57, Jan Beulich wrote: > > Only a positive return value indicates success. > > This is not correct. > Do you mean the commit message is not correct or the code is not correct? If it is the formal, do you have any

[Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen/arm64: Use the correct TLBs flush instruction to nuke stage-2 TLBs

The function flush_tlb is called to invalidate the TLBs for the current domain when the stage-2 page tables are modified. On ARMv8, the instruction "tlbi vmalle1is" (resp. "tlbi vmalle1") will invalidate stage 1 entries associated to the current VMID (see D4-1811 in ARM DDI 0487A.j). Given that

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4] xsm: add a default policy to .init.data

>>> On 05.07.16 at 19:44, wrote: > --- a/xen/include/xsm/xsm.h > +++ b/xen/include/xsm/xsm.h > @@ -762,6 +762,13 @@ static inline void flask_init(void) > } > #endif > > +#ifdef CONFIG_XSM_POLICY > +extern const unsigned char xsm_init_policy[]; > +extern const int

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 06/19] xen: credit2: read NOW() with the proper runq lock held

On Wed, 2016-07-06 at 17:10 +0100, George Dunlap wrote: > On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 8:56 AM, Jan Beulich > wrote: > >  > > > > > On 18.06.16 at 01:12, wrote: > > > Yet another situation very similar to 779511f4bf5ae > > > ("sched: avoid races on time

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 04/19] xen: credit2: kill useless helper function choose_cpu

On Wed, 2016-07-06 at 17:02 +0100, George Dunlap wrote: > On Sat, Jun 18, 2016 at 12:11 AM, Dario Faggioli > wrote: > > > > In fact, it has the same signature of csched2_cpu_pick, > > which also is its uniqe caller. > > > > Signed-off-by: Dario Faggioli

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 01/19] xen: sched: leave CPUs doing tasklet work alone.

On Wed, 2016-07-06 at 16:41 +0100, George Dunlap wrote: > On Sat, Jun 18, 2016 at 12:11 AM, Dario Faggioli >  > > diff --git a/xen/common/sched_credit.c b/xen/common/sched_credit.c > > index a38a63d..a6645a2 100644 > > --- a/xen/common/sched_credit.c > > +++ b/xen/common/sched_credit.c > > @@

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen-blkback: prefer xenbus_write() over xenbus_printf() where possible

On 07/07/16 09:06, Jan Beulich wrote: > ... as being the simpler variant. [...] > --- 4.7-rc6-prefer-xenbus_write.orig/drivers/block/xen-blkback/xenbus.c > +++ 4.7-rc6-prefer-xenbus_write/drivers/block/xen-blkback/xenbus.c > @@ -617,9 +617,9 @@ static int xen_blkbk_probe(struct xenbus >

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH linux 2/8] xen: introduce xen_vcpu_id mapping

On 07/05/2016 04:44 PM, Jan Beulich wrote: On 05.07.16 at 17:34, wrote: >> On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 03:10:11AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote: >> On 29.06.16 at 18:27, wrote: On 29/06/16 17:19, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote: > To explain

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 01/19] xen: sched: leave CPUs doing tasklet work alone.

On Mon, 2016-06-20 at 01:48 -0600, Jan Beulich wrote: > > > > On 18.06.16 at 01:11, wrote: > > --- a/xen/common/sched_credit.c > > +++ b/xen/common/sched_credit.c > > @@ -1819,24 +1819,24 @@ csched_schedule( > >  else > >  snext = csched_load_balance(prv,

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v8 4/6] arm/vm_event: get/set registers

On 07/07/16 10:57, Jan Beulich wrote: On 07.07.16 at 11:46, wrote: Anyway, I think this patch was in a good state (though few registers were needed clarification). Assuming it is ok to break the compatibility later on, I will not oppose to have a reduce set. Iirc we

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen-netback: prefer xenbus_scanf() over xenbus_gather()

>>> On 07.07.16 at 11:55, wrote: > On 07/07/16 08:57, Jan Beulich wrote: >> --- 4.7-rc6-prefer-xenbus_scanf.orig/drivers/net/xen-netback/xenbus.c >> +++ 4.7-rc6-prefer-xenbus_scanf/drivers/net/xen-netback/xenbus.c >> @@ -842,16 +842,16 @@ static int

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v8 6/6] tools/xen-access: add test-case for ARM SMC

On 05/07/16 19:37, Tamas K Lengyel wrote: +#if defined(__arm__) || defined(__aarch64__) +case VM_EVENT_REASON_PRIVILEGED_CALL: +{ +const struct vm_event_regs_arm *in_regs = +struct vm_event_regs_arm *out_regs = +

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen-fbfront: correct return value checks on xenbus_scanf()

>>> On 07.07.16 at 11:42, wrote: > On 07/07/16 09:48, Jan Beulich wrote: >> Only a positive return value indicates success. > > Hmm, I'm not convinced on this change (and the similar others as > well). From xenbus.h: > > /* Single read and scanf: returns -errno or num scanned

[Xen-devel] [ovmf test] 96743: regressions - FAIL

flight 96743 ovmf real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/96743/ Regressions :-( Tests which did not succeed and are blocking, including tests which could not be run: test-amd64-i386-xl-qemuu-ovmf-amd64 17 guest-start/debianhvm.repeat fail REGR. vs. 94748

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen-blkfront: prefer xenbus_write() over xenbus_printf() where possible

>>> On 07.07.16 at 11:44, wrote: > On Thu, Jul 07, 2016 at 02:06:33AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote: >> ... as being the simpler variant. >> >> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich >> --- >> drivers/block/xen-blkfront.c |7 +++ >> 1 file changed, 3

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] credi2-ratelimit: Implement rate limit for credit2 scheduler

On Wed, 2016-07-06 at 18:33 +0100, anshul.mak...@citrix.com wrote: > From: Anshul Makkar > Hey, Anshul, Thanks for doing this! > Rate limit assures that a vcpu will execute for a minimum amount of > time before > being put at the back of a queue or being preempted by

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen-netback: correct return value checks on xenbus_scanf()

On 07/07/16 08:57, Jan Beulich wrote: > Only a positive return value indicates success. This is not correct. David ___ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen-netfront: correct return value checks on xenbus_scanf()

On 07/07/16 08:59, Jan Beulich wrote: > Only a positive return value indicates success. This checks were already correct. David ___ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen-netback: prefer xenbus_scanf() over xenbus_gather()

On 07/07/16 08:57, Jan Beulich wrote: > ... for single items being collected: It is more typesafe (as the > compiler can check format string and to-be-written-to variable match) > and requires one less parameter to be passed. Do not split commit messages between the subject and the body in this

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen-blkback: constify instance of "struct attribute_group"

On 07/07/16 10:45, Roger Pau Monne wrote: > On Thu, Jul 07, 2016 at 01:38:58AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote: >> The functions such get passed to have been taking pointers to const >> since at least 2.6.16. >> >> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich > Acked-by: Roger Pau Monné

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen/mcelog: also build for x86-32

>>> On 07.07.16 at 11:40, wrote: > On 07/07/16 08:35, Jan Beulich wrote: >> There's no reason why this would need to be limited to x86-64. > > Did you test it? Well, its original version in the 2.6.18 tree did get enabled for 32-bit use in the course of forward porting

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen-fbfront: correct return value checks on xenbus_scanf()

On 07/07/16 08:48, Jan Beulich wrote: > > Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich > --- > drivers/video/fbdev/xen-fbfront.c |4 ++-- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > --- 4.7-rc6-xenbus_scanf.orig/drivers/video/fbdev/xen-fbfront.c > +++

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v8 4/6] arm/vm_event: get/set registers

On 07/07/16 09:23, Jan Beulich wrote: On 06.07.16 at 21:12, wrote: On Wed, Jul 6, 2016 at 12:04 PM, Julien Grall wrote: On 05/07/16 19:37, Tamas K Lengyel wrote: +void vm_event_fill_regs(vm_event_request_t *req) +{ +const struct

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 12/19] xen: credit2: use non-atomic cpumask and bit operations

On Sat, Jun 18, 2016 at 12:12 AM, Dario Faggioli wrote: > as all the accesses to both the masks and the flags are > serialized by the runqueues locks already. > > Signed-off-by: Dario Faggioli Acked-by: George Dunlap

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen-blkback: constify instance of "struct attribute_group"

On Thu, Jul 07, 2016 at 01:38:58AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote: > The functions such get passed to have been taking pointers to const > since at least 2.6.16. > > Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich Acked-by: Roger Pau Monné Although the wording in the commit

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen-blkfront: prefer xenbus_write() over xenbus_printf() where possible

On Thu, Jul 07, 2016 at 02:06:33AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote: > ... as being the simpler variant. > > Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich > --- > drivers/block/xen-blkfront.c |7 +++ > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > ---

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen-blkback: prefer xenbus_write() over xenbus_printf() where possible

On Thu, Jul 07, 2016 at 02:06:12AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote: > ... as being the simpler variant. > > Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich Acked-by: Roger Pau Monné ___ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen-fbfront: correct return value checks on xenbus_scanf()

On 07/07/16 09:48, Jan Beulich wrote: > Only a positive return value indicates success. Hmm, I'm not convinced on this change (and the similar others as well). From xenbus.h: /* Single read and scanf: returns -errno or num scanned if > 0. */ There should be no case for xenbus_scanf() returning

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen-blkfront: avoid NULL de-reference in CDROM ioctl handling

>>> On 07.07.16 at 11:32, wrote: > On Thu, Jul 07, 2016 at 01:40:54AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote: >> The ioctl can be called prior to full device setup having completed. >> >> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich >> --- >> drivers/block/xen-blkfront.c |6 ++

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen-blkfront: prefer xenbus_scanf() over xenbus_gather()

On Thu, Jul 07, 2016 at 02:05:46AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote: > ... for single items being collected: It is more typesafe (as the > compiler can check format string and to-be-written-to variable match) > and requires one less parameter to be passed. > > Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen/mcelog: also build for x86-32

On 07/07/16 08:35, Jan Beulich wrote: > There's no reason why this would need to be limited to x86-64. Did you test it? David ___ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen/privcmd: sprinkle around cond_resched() calls in mmap ioctl handling

On 07/07/16 08:35, Jan Beulich wrote: > Many of these operations can take arbitrarily long, which can become a > problem irrespective of them being exposed to privileged users only. If this is a concern I would rather see large numbers of mapping requests processed in smaller batches. This would

[Xen-devel] (no subject)

On Sat, Jun 18, 2016 at 12:12 AM, Dario Faggioli wrote: > in both xenalyze and formats (for xentrace_format). > > In particular, in xenalyze, now that we have the precision > of the fixed point load values in the tracepoint, show both > the raw value and the (easier to

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen-blkback: prefer xenbus_scanf() over xenbus_gather()

On Thu, Jul 07, 2016 at 02:05:21AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote: > ... for single items being collected: It is more typesafe (as the > compiler can check format string and to-be-written-to variable match) > and requires one less parameter to be passed. > > Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen-blkfront: avoid NULL de-reference in CDROM ioctl handling

On Thu, Jul 07, 2016 at 01:40:54AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote: > The ioctl can be called prior to full device setup having completed. > > Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich > --- > drivers/block/xen-blkfront.c |6 ++ > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > ---

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v1 00/20] Make ACPI builder available to components other than hvmloader

On 07/07/16 10:20, Jan Beulich wrote: On 07.07.16 at 11:14, wrote: On 07/07/16 09:35, Jan Beulich wrote: On 06.07.16 at 18:32, wrote: On 07/06/2016 12:04 PM, Roger Pau Monné wrote: On Tue, Jul 05, 2016 at 03:04:59PM -0400, Boris Ostrovsky

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v1 00/20] Make ACPI builder available to components other than hvmloader

>>> On 07.07.16 at 11:14, wrote: > On 07/07/16 09:35, Jan Beulich wrote: > On 06.07.16 at 18:32, wrote: >>> On 07/06/2016 12:04 PM, Roger Pau Monné wrote: On Tue, Jul 05, 2016 at 03:04:59PM -0400, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: > * Don't set

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 07/19] xen: credit2: prevent load balancing to go mad if time goes backwards

>>> On 07.07.16 at 11:09, wrote: > On 07/07/16 08:29, Jan Beulich wrote: > On 06.07.16 at 18:21, wrote: >>> On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 9:02 AM, Jan Beulich wrote: >>> On 18.06.16 at 01:12,

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen-blkback: really don't leak mode property

On Thu, Jul 07, 2016 at 01:38:13AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote: > Commit 9d092603cc ("xen-blkback: do not leak mode property") left one > path unfixed; correct this. > > Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich Acked-by: Roger Pau Monné

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 14/18] arm/altp2m: Add HVMOP_altp2m_set_mem_access.

Hi Julien, On 07/06/2016 07:08 PM, Julien Grall wrote: > Hi, > > On 04/07/16 12:45, Sergej Proskurin wrote: >> --- a/xen/arch/arm/p2m.c >> +++ b/xen/arch/arm/p2m.c >> @@ -2085,6 +2085,159 @@ bool_t p2m_mem_access_check(paddr_t gpa, >> vaddr_t gla, const struct npfec npfec) > > [...] > >> +static

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 02/18] arm/altp2m: Add first altp2m HVMOP stubs.

Hi Julien, On 07/06/2016 08:35 PM, Julien Grall wrote: > > > On 06/07/16 17:35, Tamas K Lengyel wrote: >> On Wed, Jul 6, 2016 at 10:29 AM, Julien Grall >> wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 06/07/16 17:05, Tamas K Lengyel wrote: On Wed, Jul 6, 2016 at 9:54 AM, Julien Grall

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v1 00/20] Make ACPI builder available to components other than hvmloader

On 07/07/16 09:35, Jan Beulich wrote: On 06.07.16 at 18:32, wrote: On 07/06/2016 12:04 PM, Roger Pau Monné wrote: On Tue, Jul 05, 2016 at 03:04:59PM -0400, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: * Don't set HW_REDUCED_ACPI flags: this flag is only available starting with ACPI

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 07/19] xen: credit2: prevent load balancing to go mad if time goes backwards

On 07/07/16 08:29, Jan Beulich wrote: On 06.07.16 at 18:21, wrote: >> On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 9:02 AM, Jan Beulich wrote: >> On 18.06.16 at 01:12, wrote: This really should not happen, but: 1. it does

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v3 6/8] x86/vm-event: minor ASSERT fix, add 'unlikely'

>>> On 07.07.16 at 10:35, wrote: > On 7/7/2016 11:27 AM, Jan Beulich wrote: > On 06.07.16 at 17:54, wrote: >>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/vm_event.c >>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/vm_event.c >>> @@ -96,14 +96,16 @@ void vm_event_register_write_resume(struct vcpu

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v1] hvmloader, pci: Don't try to relocate memory if 64-bit BAR is bigger than 4GB

>>> On 06.07.16 at 20:16, wrote: > @@ -269,8 +269,19 @@ void pci_setup(void) > if ( ((bar_data & PCI_BASE_ADDRESS_SPACE) == >PCI_BASE_ADDRESS_SPACE_MEMORY) || > (bar_reg == PCI_ROM_ADDRESS) ) > -mmio_total

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v1 20/20] libxl/acpi: Build ACPI tables for HVMlite guests

>>> On 06.07.16 at 19:33, wrote: > On 07/06/2016 01:03 PM, Julien Grall wrote: >> >> >> On 06/07/16 17:30, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: >>> On 07/06/2016 12:04 PM, Julien Grall wrote: Hi Boris, On 06/07/16 16:50, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: > On 07/06/2016

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v3 6/8] x86/vm-event: minor ASSERT fix, add 'unlikely'

On 7/7/2016 11:27 AM, Jan Beulich wrote: On 06.07.16 at 17:54, wrote: --- a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c +++ b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c @@ -475,7 +475,7 @@ void hvm_do_resume(struct vcpu *v) if ( unlikely(v->arch.vm_event) ) { -if (

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v1 00/20] Make ACPI builder available to components other than hvmloader

>>> On 06.07.16 at 18:32, wrote: > On 07/06/2016 12:04 PM, Roger Pau Monné wrote: >> On Tue, Jul 05, 2016 at 03:04:59PM -0400, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: >>> * Don't set HW_REDUCED_ACPI flags: this flag is only available starting >>> with ACPI v5 >> Hm, I still think

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v3 6/8] x86/vm-event: minor ASSERT fix, add 'unlikely'

>>> On 06.07.16 at 17:54, wrote: > --- a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c > +++ b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c > @@ -475,7 +475,7 @@ void hvm_do_resume(struct vcpu *v) > > if ( unlikely(v->arch.vm_event) ) > { > -if ( v->arch.vm_event->emulate_flags ) > +if (

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen-netback: prefer xenbus_write() over xenbus_printf() where possible

> -Original Message- > From: Xen-devel [mailto:xen-devel-boun...@lists.xen.org] On Behalf Of Jan > Beulich > Sent: 07 July 2016 08:58 > To: Wei Liu > Cc: xen-de...@lists.xenproject.org; net...@vger.kernel.org > Subject: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen-netback: prefer xenbus_write() over >

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen-netback: correct return value checks on xenbus_scanf()

> -Original Message- > From: Xen-devel [mailto:xen-devel-boun...@lists.xen.org] On Behalf Of Jan > Beulich > Sent: 07 July 2016 08:57 > To: Wei Liu > Cc: xen-de...@lists.xenproject.org; net...@vger.kernel.org > Subject: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen-netback: correct return value checks on >

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v8 4/6] arm/vm_event: get/set registers

>>> On 06.07.16 at 21:12, wrote: > On Wed, Jul 6, 2016 at 12:04 PM, Julien Grall wrote: >> >> >> On 05/07/16 19:37, Tamas K Lengyel wrote: >>> >>> +void vm_event_fill_regs(vm_event_request_t *req) >>> +{ >>> +const struct cpu_user_regs *regs

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v3 4/8] x86/vm_event/monitor/cr: check for vm-event subscriber on domctl

On 7/6/2016 6:52 PM, Corneliu ZUZU wrote: Enforce presence of a monitor vm-event subscriber when the toolstack user calls xc_monitor_write_ctrlreg (XEN_DOMCTL_MONITOR_EVENT_WRITE_CTRLREG domctl). Without this change, ASSERT(v->arch.vm_event) @ hvm_set_cr0 and such would fail if the toolstack

<    1   2   3   >