[Xen-devel] [libvirt test] 105657: tolerable FAIL - PUSHED

flight 105657 libvirt real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/105657/ Failures :-/ but no regressions. Regressions which are regarded as allowable (not blocking): test-armhf-armhf-libvirt-xsm 13 saverestore-support-checkfail like 105624 test-armhf-armhf-libvirt 13

[Xen-devel] [PATCH V2] common/vm_event: Prevent guest locking with large max_vcpus

It is currently possible for the guest to lock when subscribing to synchronous vm_events if max_vcpus is larger than the number of available ring buffer slots. This patch no longer blocks already paused VCPUs, fixing the issue for this use case, and wakes up as many blocked VCPUs as there are

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v6 01/24] docs: create Cache Allocation Technology (CAT) and Code and Data Prioritization (CDP) feature document

On 17-02-08 10:56:55, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: > On Wed, Feb 08, 2017 at 04:15:53PM +0800, Yi Sun wrote: > > + Every MSR stores a CBM value. A capacity bitmask (CBM) provides a hint > > to the > > + hardware indicating the cache space an application should be limited to > > as > >

Re: [Xen-devel] arm: alloc_heap_pages allocates already allocated page

On Wed, Feb 8, 2017 at 9:12 PM, Julien Grall wrote: > > > On 08/02/17 14:18, Julien Grall wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On 07/02/17 15:59, Vijay Kilari wrote: >>> On Tue, Feb 7, 2017 at 6:57 PM, Julien Grall wrote: On 07/02/2017 13:25, Vijay

[Xen-devel] [xen-unstable test] 105648: regressions - trouble: blocked/broken/fail/pass

flight 105648 xen-unstable real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/105648/ Regressions :-( Tests which did not succeed and are blocking, including tests which could not be run: test-armhf-armhf-xl-vhd 3 host-install(3)broken REGR. vs. 105629

[Xen-devel] [qemu-mainline test] 105656: regressions - FAIL

flight 105656 qemu-mainline real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/105656/ Regressions :-( Tests which did not succeed and are blocking, including tests which could not be run: build-i386-xsm5 xen-buildfail REGR. vs. 105279 build-amd64

[Xen-devel] [ovmf baseline-only test] 68540: all pass

This run is configured for baseline tests only. flight 68540 ovmf real [real] http://osstest.xs.citrite.net/~osstest/testlogs/logs/68540/ Perfect :-) All tests in this flight passed as required version targeted for testing: ovmf ad1cd1aa09c0a8660c857de916105b1fd566ca8c baseline

[Xen-devel] [qemu-mainline test] 105654: regressions - FAIL

flight 105654 qemu-mainline real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/105654/ Regressions :-( Tests which did not succeed and are blocking, including tests which could not be run: build-i386-xsm5 xen-buildfail REGR. vs. 105279 build-amd64

Re: [Xen-devel] [RFC XEN PATCH 15/16] tools/libxl: handle return code of libxl__qmp_initializations()

On 02/08/17 10:31 +, Wei Liu wrote: On Wed, Feb 08, 2017 at 02:07:26PM +0800, Haozhong Zhang wrote: On 01/27/17 17:11 -0500, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: > On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 08:32:34AM +0800, Haozhong Zhang wrote: > > If any error code is returned when creating a domain, stop the

[Xen-devel] [ovmf test] 105652: all pass - PUSHED

flight 105652 ovmf real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/105652/ Perfect :-) All tests in this flight passed as required version targeted for testing: ovmf ad1cd1aa09c0a8660c857de916105b1fd566ca8c baseline version: ovmf

[Xen-devel] [xen-unstable-smoke test] 105653: tolerable trouble: broken/fail/pass - PUSHED

flight 105653 xen-unstable-smoke real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/105653/ Failures :-/ but no regressions. Tests which did not succeed, but are not blocking: test-arm64-arm64-xl-xsm 1 build-check(1) blocked n/a build-arm64 5

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 0/9] libxl: spolit up libxl.c

On 02/09/2017 12:54 AM, Wei Liu wrote: And CC Zhangchen Thanks, I will apply this patch set before test my patch. Zhang Chen On Wed, Feb 08, 2017 at 02:35:27PM +, Wei Liu wrote: Cc Yi Sun as well. Haozhong and Yi: This is just a heads-up -- Juergen from SuSE took the time to split

[Xen-devel] [linux-linus test] 105641: regressions - FAIL

flight 105641 linux-linus real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/105641/ Regressions :-( Tests which did not succeed and are blocking, including tests which could not be run: test-amd64-amd64-xl-multivcpu 14 guest-saverestorefail REGR. vs. 59254

Re: [Xen-devel] [RFC v2 3/6] xen/arm: Allow platform_hvc to handle guest SMC calls

On Thu, 9 Feb 2017, Julien Grall wrote: > On 08/02/2017 23:28, Tamas K Lengyel wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 8, 2017 at 3:04 PM, Julien Grall wrote: > > > Hi Tamas, > > > > > > Can you please try to configure your e-mail client to use '>' rather than > > > ' > > > '? It makes

[Xen-devel] [qemu-mainline test] 105643: regressions - FAIL

flight 105643 qemu-mainline real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/105643/ Regressions :-( Tests which did not succeed and are blocking, including tests which could not be run: build-i386-xsm5 xen-buildfail REGR. vs. 105279 build-amd64

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 0/9] libxl: spolit up libxl.c

On 02/08/17 14:35 +, Wei Liu wrote: Cc Yi Sun as well. Haozhong and Yi: This is just a heads-up -- Juergen from SuSE took the time to split libxl.c so things are better organised. It's likely this series will go in before yours, so you will then need to rebase your series. I don't expect

[Xen-devel] [ovmf baseline-only test] 68539: all pass

This run is configured for baseline tests only. flight 68539 ovmf real [real] http://osstest.xs.citrite.net/~osstest/testlogs/logs/68539/ Perfect :-) All tests in this flight passed as required version targeted for testing: ovmf 9fe9cf9acb475af9317dcdaf32a93f1cb77d95ac baseline

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 1/2] x86/vmx: Introduce a bitfield structure for EPT_VIOLATION EXIT_QUALIFICATIONs

> From: Andrew Cooper [mailto:andrew.coop...@citrix.com] > Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2017 6:43 PM > > This results in rather more readable code. No functional change. > > All fields currently specified are included, but commented out as no support > for their use is present. > >

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v6] x86/hvm: add vcpu parameter to guest memory copy function

> From: Jan Beulich [mailto:jbeul...@suse.com] > Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2017 9:37 PM > > >>> On 07.02.17 at 18:35, wrote: > > Current __hvm_copy assumes that the destination memory belongs to the > > current > > vcpu, but this is not always the case since for PVHv2

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v3 2/4] x86/vmx: improve vmread_safe()

> From: Sergey Dyasli [mailto:sergey.dya...@citrix.com] > Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2017 6:10 PM > > The original function doesn't distinguish between Valid and Invalid > VMfails. Improved function returns error code depending on the outcome: > > VMsucceed: 0 > VMfailValid: VM

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v3 1/4] x86/vmx: introduce vmwrite_safe()

> From: Sergey Dyasli [mailto:sergey.dya...@citrix.com] > Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2017 6:10 PM > > Any fail during the original __vmwrite() leads to BUG() which can be > easily exploited from a guest in the nested vmx mode. > > The new function returns error code depending on the outcome:

Re: [Xen-devel] Xen ARM - Exposing a PL011 to the guest

On Wed, 8 Feb 2017, Bhupinder Thakur wrote: > Hi Julien, > > On 3 February 2017 at 19:38, Julien Grall wrote: > > So if I understand correctly, you don't receive anymore output. Correct? > > Have you tried to see whether the pl011 driver is receiving interrupt or > > even

Re: [Xen-devel] [RFC v2 3/6] xen/arm: Allow platform_hvc to handle guest SMC calls

On 08/02/2017 23:28, Tamas K Lengyel wrote: On Wed, Feb 8, 2017 at 3:04 PM, Julien Grall wrote: Hi Tamas, Can you please try to configure your e-mail client to use '>' rather than ' '? It makes quite hard to read the e-mail. Hm, not sure why it switched but should be

[Xen-devel] [xen-unstable-smoke test] 105650: regressions - trouble: blocked/broken/fail/pass

flight 105650 xen-unstable-smoke real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/105650/ Regressions :-( Tests which did not succeed and are blocking, including tests which could not be run: build-armhf 5 xen-buildfail REGR. vs. 105642 Tests which

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen/arm: Fix ARM build following c/s 11c397c

On Wed, 8 Feb 2017, Andrew Cooper wrote: > On 08/02/2017 19:24, Julien Grall wrote: > > > > > > On 08/02/17 19:21, Andrew Cooper wrote: > >> On 08/02/17 19:13, Julien Grall wrote: > >>> Hi Andrew, > >>> > >>> On 08/02/17 19:10, Andrew Cooper wrote: > c/s 11c397c broke the ARM build by

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen/arm64: Don't zero BSS when booting using EFI

On Wed, 8 Feb 2017, Julien Grall wrote: > Commit 146786b "efi: create efi_enabled()" introduced a variable > efi_flags stored in BSS and used to pass information between the stub > and Xen. However on ARM, BSS is zeroed after the stub has finished to > run and before Xen is started. This means

Re: [Xen-devel] [RFC v2 3/6] xen/arm: Allow platform_hvc to handle guest SMC calls

On Wed, Feb 8, 2017 at 3:04 PM, Julien Grall wrote: > Hi Tamas, > > Can you please try to configure your e-mail client to use '>' rather than ' > '? It makes quite hard to read the e-mail. Hm, not sure why it switched but should be fine now. > On 08/02/2017 20:15, Tamas K

[Xen-devel] [linux-3.18 baseline-only test] 68537: regressions - trouble: blocked/broken/fail/pass

This run is configured for baseline tests only. flight 68537 linux-3.18 real [real] http://osstest.xs.citrite.net/~osstest/testlogs/logs/68537/ Regressions :-( Tests which did not succeed and are blocking, including tests which could not be run: test-amd64-amd64-qemuu-nested-intel 16

[Xen-devel] [xen-unstable-smoke test] 105647: regressions - trouble: blocked/broken/fail/pass

flight 105647 xen-unstable-smoke real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/105647/ Regressions :-( Tests which did not succeed and are blocking, including tests which could not be run: build-armhf 5 xen-buildfail REGR. vs. 105642 Tests which

[Xen-devel] [ovmf baseline-only test] 68538: all pass

This run is configured for baseline tests only. flight 68538 ovmf real [real] http://osstest.xs.citrite.net/~osstest/testlogs/logs/68538/ Perfect :-) All tests in this flight passed as required version targeted for testing: ovmf cc20411062137e5d820a33db73d41f97dae74368 baseline

Re: [Xen-devel] [libvirt] [PATCH 2/2] libxl: fix dom0 maximum memory setting

Joao Martins wrote: > On 02/08/2017 04:06 PM, Jim Fehlig wrote: >> Joao Martins wrote: >>> On 02/02/2017 10:31 PM, Jim Fehlig wrote: When the libxl driver is initialized, it creates a virDomainDef object for dom0 and adds it to the list of domains. Total memory for dom0 was being

Re: [Xen-devel] [RFC v2 3/6] xen/arm: Allow platform_hvc to handle guest SMC calls

Hi Tamas, Can you please try to configure your e-mail client to use '>' rather than ''? It makes quite hard to read the e-mail. On 08/02/2017 20:15, Tamas K Lengyel wrote: On Wed, Feb 8, 2017 at 12:40 PM, Edgar E. Iglesias >

[Xen-devel] [xen-unstable test] 105640: regressions - FAIL

flight 105640 xen-unstable real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/105640/ Regressions :-( Tests which did not succeed and are blocking, including tests which could not be run: test-amd64-i386-xl-qemut-debianhvm-amd64 15 guest-localmigrate/x10 fail REGR. vs. 105629

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2] xen/p2m: Fix p2m_flush_table for non-nested cases

On Wed, Feb 8, 2017 at 11:12 AM, George Dunlap wrote: > On 08/02/17 17:29, Tim Deegan wrote: > > At 17:22 + on 08 Feb (1486574546), George Dunlap wrote: > >> Commit 71bb7304e7a7a35ea6df4b0cedebc35028e4c159 added flushing of > >> nested p2m tables whenever the host

[Xen-devel] [xen-unstable-smoke test] 105645: regressions - trouble: blocked/broken/fail/pass

flight 105645 xen-unstable-smoke real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/105645/ Regressions :-( Tests which did not succeed and are blocking, including tests which could not be run: build-armhf 5 xen-buildfail REGR. vs. 105642 Tests which

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/2] x86/paravirt: Don't make vcpu_is_preempted() a callee-save function

On 02/08/2017 02:05 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Wed, Feb 08, 2017 at 01:00:24PM -0500, Waiman Long wrote: >> It was found when running fio sequential write test with a XFS ramdisk >> on a 2-socket x86-64 system, the %CPU times as reported by perf were >> as follows: >> >> 71.27% 0.28% fio

Re: [Xen-devel] [RFC v2 3/6] xen/arm: Allow platform_hvc to handle guest SMC calls

On Wed, Feb 8, 2017 at 12:40 PM, Edgar E. Iglesias wrote: > On Wed, Feb 08, 2017 at 06:29:13PM +0100, Edgar E. Iglesias wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 08, 2017 at 04:58:44PM +, Julien Grall wrote: > > > Hi Tamas, > > > > > > On 08/02/17 16:40, Tamas K Lengyel wrote: > > >

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 0/2] ocaml: Start on fixing brokenness when no ocamlopt

Hi, On 24/01/17 22:19, David Scott wrote: > >> On 24 Jan 2017, at 11:35, Ian Jackson wrote: >> >> Ian Jackson writes ("[PATCH 0/2] ocaml: Start on fixing brokenness when no >> ocamlopt"): >>> Debian jessie arm64 has Ocaml (in the package `ocaml-nox') but the >>>

Re: [Xen-devel] Xen 4.9 Development Update

On 02/08/2017 09:29 PM, Julien Grall wrote: Hi Oleksandr, On 08/02/17 18:56, Oleksandr Andrushchenko wrote: On 02/08/2017 08:17 PM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: On Wed, Feb 08, 2017 at 06:03:00PM +, Julien Grall wrote: (CC Konrad) Hi Oleksandr, On 31/01/17 13:51, Oleksandr

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen/arm: Fix ARM build following c/s 11c397c

On 08/02/2017 19:24, Julien Grall wrote: > > > On 08/02/17 19:21, Andrew Cooper wrote: >> On 08/02/17 19:13, Julien Grall wrote: >>> Hi Andrew, >>> >>> On 08/02/17 19:10, Andrew Cooper wrote: c/s 11c397c broke the ARM build by introducing a common ACCESS_ONCE() which is different to

Re: [Xen-devel] [RFC v2 3/6] xen/arm: Allow platform_hvc to handle guest SMC calls

On Wed, Feb 08, 2017 at 06:29:13PM +0100, Edgar E. Iglesias wrote: > On Wed, Feb 08, 2017 at 04:58:44PM +, Julien Grall wrote: > > Hi Tamas, > > > > On 08/02/17 16:40, Tamas K Lengyel wrote: > > >On Wed, Feb 8, 2017 at 1:31 AM, Edgar E. Iglesias > > >

Re: [Xen-devel] Xen 4.9 Development Update

Hi Oleksandr, On 08/02/17 18:56, Oleksandr Andrushchenko wrote: On 02/08/2017 08:17 PM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: On Wed, Feb 08, 2017 at 06:03:00PM +, Julien Grall wrote: (CC Konrad) Hi Oleksandr, On 31/01/17 13:51, Oleksandr Andrushchenko wrote: On 01/30/2017 05:33 PM, Julien

Re: [Xen-devel] Xen 4.9 Development Update

On 08/02/17 18:17, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: On Wed, Feb 08, 2017 at 06:03:00PM +, Julien Grall wrote: (CC Konrad) Hi Oleksandr, On 31/01/17 13:51, Oleksandr Andrushchenko wrote: On 01/30/2017 05:33 PM, Julien Grall wrote: This email only tracks big items for xen.git tree. Please

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen/arm: Fix ARM build following c/s 11c397c

On 08/02/17 19:21, Andrew Cooper wrote: On 08/02/17 19:13, Julien Grall wrote: Hi Andrew, On 08/02/17 19:10, Andrew Cooper wrote: c/s 11c397c broke the ARM build by introducing a common ACCESS_ONCE() which is different to the definiton in smmu.c Forgot this one s/definiton/definition/

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen/arm: Fix ARM build following c/s 11c397c

On 08/02/17 19:13, Julien Grall wrote: > Hi Andrew, > > On 08/02/17 19:10, Andrew Cooper wrote: >> c/s 11c397c broke the ARM build by introducing a common ACCESS_ONCE() >> which is >> different to the definiton in smmu.c >> >> The SMMU code included a scalar typecheck, which is worth keeping in

Re: [Xen-devel] [DOC v4] Xen transport for 9pfs

> ## Ring Setup > > The shared page has the following layout: > > typedef uint32_t XEN_9PFS_RING_IDX; > > struct xen_9pfs_intf { > XEN_9PFS_RING_IDX in_cons, in_prod; > uint8_t pad[56]; > XEN_9PFS_RING_IDX out_cons, out_prod; > > uint32_t ring_order; >

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen/arm: Fix ARM build following c/s 11c397c

Hi Andrew, On 08/02/17 19:10, Andrew Cooper wrote: c/s 11c397c broke the ARM build by introducing a common ACCESS_ONCE() which is different to the definiton in smmu.c The SMMU code included a scalar typecheck, which is worth keeping in the common case, given ACCESS_ONCE()'s restrictions.

[Xen-devel] [xen-unstable-smoke test] 105644: regressions - trouble: blocked/broken/fail/pass

flight 105644 xen-unstable-smoke real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/105644/ Regressions :-( Tests which did not succeed and are blocking, including tests which could not be run: test-amd64-amd64-xl-qemuu-debianhvm-i386 15 guest-localmigrate/x10 fail REGR. vs. 105642

[Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen/arm: Fix ARM build following c/s 11c397c

c/s 11c397c broke the ARM build by introducing a common ACCESS_ONCE() which is different to the definiton in smmu.c The SMMU code included a scalar typecheck, which is worth keeping in the common case, given ACCESS_ONCE()'s restrictions. However, express the typecheck differently so as to avoid

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 2/2] locking/mutex, rwsem: Reduce vcpu_is_preempted() calling frequency

On 02/08/2017 02:05 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Wed, Feb 08, 2017 at 01:00:25PM -0500, Waiman Long wrote: >> As the vcpu_is_preempted() call is pretty costly compared with other >> checks within mutex_spin_on_owner() and rwsem_spin_on_owner(), they >> are done at a reduce frequency of once

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v3] xen/arm: fix rank/vgic lock inversion bug

Hi Stefano, On 02/02/17 22:56, Stefano Stabellini wrote: On Thu, 2 Feb 2017, Julien Grall wrote: On 01/02/17 23:23, Stefano Stabellini wrote: On Wed, 1 Feb 2017, Julien Grall wrote: On 31/01/2017 23:49, Stefano Stabellini wrote: On Fri, 27 Jan 2017, Julien Grall wrote: On 03/01/17 23:29,

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 2/2] locking/mutex, rwsem: Reduce vcpu_is_preempted() calling frequency

On Wed, Feb 08, 2017 at 01:00:25PM -0500, Waiman Long wrote: > As the vcpu_is_preempted() call is pretty costly compared with other > checks within mutex_spin_on_owner() and rwsem_spin_on_owner(), they > are done at a reduce frequency of once every 256 iterations. That's just disgusting.

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/2] x86/paravirt: Don't make vcpu_is_preempted() a callee-save function

On Wed, Feb 08, 2017 at 01:00:24PM -0500, Waiman Long wrote: > It was found when running fio sequential write test with a XFS ramdisk > on a 2-socket x86-64 system, the %CPU times as reported by perf were > as follows: > > 71.27% 0.28% fio [k] down_write > 70.99% 0.01% fio [k]

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v6 04/24] x86: refactor psr: implement CPU init and free flow.

> > +static void cpu_fini_work(unsigned int cpu) > > +{ > > +unsigned int socket = cpu_to_socket(cpu); > > + > > +if ( !socket_cpumask[socket] || cpumask_empty(socket_cpumask[socket]) ) > > I fear I don't understand this. > > Looking at 65a399ac it says: > > +.notifier_call =

Re: [Xen-devel] Xen 4.9 Development Update

> > > * Altp2m for ARM > - Sergej Proskurin > This was a GSoC project last summer that unfortunately didn't make the merge window. I'll probably pick it up sometime in the future and get it rebased but it is unlikely to happen for 4.9. Tamas ___

Re: [Xen-devel] Xen 4.9 Development Update

On 02/08/2017 08:17 PM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: On Wed, Feb 08, 2017 at 06:03:00PM +, Julien Grall wrote: (CC Konrad) Hi Oleksandr, On 31/01/17 13:51, Oleksandr Andrushchenko wrote: On 01/30/2017 05:33 PM, Julien Grall wrote: This email only tracks big items for xen.git tree.

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 2/5] xen: credit2: never consider CPUs outside of our cpupool.

On Wed, 2017-02-08 at 10:02 -0700, Jan Beulich wrote: > > > > On 08.02.17 at 17:48, wrote: > > Am I looking in the wrong places / misunderstood anything? > > Well, me having done the backports didn't imply me committing them > right away; I wanted them to first undergo

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 2/8] xen/arm: acpi: Rework acpi_boot_table_init error paths

Hi Andrew, On 03/02/17 20:44, Andrew Cooper wrote: On 03/02/17 19:18, Julien Grall wrote: @@ -260,16 +257,22 @@ int __init acpi_boot_table_init(void) error = acpi_table_init(); if ( error ) { -disable_acpi(); -return error; +printk("%s: Unable to

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] x86/p2m: Reposition p2m_teardown_nestedp2m() to avoid its forward declaration

On 07/02/17 18:43, Andrew Cooper wrote: > While adjusting these functions, use unsigned int rather than uint8_t for the > loop variable, and fix the whitespace style. > > No functional change. I think changing a variable from 8 to 64 bits might count as a functional change; but anyway:

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xenbus: Neaten xenbus_va_dev_error

On Wed, 2017-02-08 at 12:14 -0500, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: > On 02/08/2017 11:05 AM, Joe Perches wrote: > > On Wed, 2017-02-08 at 10:33 -0500, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: > > > On 02/08/2017 06:33 AM, Joe Perches wrote: > > > > This function error patch can be simplified, so do so. > > > > > > > >

Re: [Xen-devel] Xen 4.9 Development Update

On Wed, Feb 08, 2017 at 06:03:00PM +, Julien Grall wrote: > (CC Konrad) > > Hi Oleksandr, > > On 31/01/17 13:51, Oleksandr Andrushchenko wrote: > > > > On 01/30/2017 05:33 PM, Julien Grall wrote: > > > This email only tracks big items for xen.git tree. Please reply for > > > items you > > >

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2] xen/p2m: Fix p2m_flush_table for non-nested cases

On 08/02/17 17:29, Tim Deegan wrote: > At 17:22 + on 08 Feb (1486574546), George Dunlap wrote: >> Commit 71bb7304e7a7a35ea6df4b0cedebc35028e4c159 added flushing of >> nested p2m tables whenever the host p2m table changed. Unfortunately >> in the process, it added a filter to p2m_flush_table()

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] x86/p2m: Stop other vcpus using a nested p2m before clearing it

On 08/02/17 18:06, George Dunlap wrote: > On 08/02/17 13:20, Andrew Cooper wrote: >> On 08/02/17 13:13, Jan Beulich wrote: >> On 07.02.17 at 19:48, wrote: Until the IPI has completed, other processors might be running on this nested p2m object.

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] x86/p2m: Stop other vcpus using a nested p2m before clearing it

On 08/02/17 13:20, Andrew Cooper wrote: > On 08/02/17 13:13, Jan Beulich wrote: > On 07.02.17 at 19:48, wrote: >>> Until the IPI has completed, other processors might be running on this >>> nested >>> p2m object. clear_domain_page() does not guarantee to make

Re: [Xen-devel] Xen 4.9 Development Update

(CC Konrad) Hi Oleksandr, On 31/01/17 13:51, Oleksandr Andrushchenko wrote: On 01/30/2017 05:33 PM, Julien Grall wrote: This email only tracks big items for xen.git tree. Please reply for items you woulk like to see in 4.9 so that people have an idea what is going on and prioritise

[Xen-devel] [PATCH 2/2] locking/mutex, rwsem: Reduce vcpu_is_preempted() calling frequency

As the vcpu_is_preempted() call is pretty costly compared with other checks within mutex_spin_on_owner() and rwsem_spin_on_owner(), they are done at a reduce frequency of once every 256 iterations. Signed-off-by: Waiman Long --- kernel/locking/mutex.c | 5 -

[Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/2] x86/paravirt: Don't make vcpu_is_preempted() a callee-save function

It was found when running fio sequential write test with a XFS ramdisk on a 2-socket x86-64 system, the %CPU times as reported by perf were as follows: 71.27% 0.28% fio [k] down_write 70.99% 0.01% fio [k] call_rwsem_down_write_failed 69.43% 1.18% fio [k] rwsem_down_write_failed

Re: [Xen-devel] Xen 4.9 Development Update

Hi Wei, On 30/01/17 15:45, Wei Liu wrote: On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 03:32:49PM +, Julien Grall wrote: [...] I think it would be good to main two lists. One of "the stuff people are working on overall", and "the subset of it intended/expected for the forthcoming release". Stuff will

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] common/vm_event: Prevent guest locking with large max_vcpus

On 02/08/2017 07:20 PM, Andrew Cooper wrote: > On 08/02/17 17:08, Razvan Cojocaru wrote: >> On 02/08/2017 06:25 PM, Tamas K Lengyel wrote: >>> >>> On Wed, Feb 8, 2017 at 2:00 AM, Razvan Cojocaru >>> > wrote: >>> >>> It is currently

[Xen-devel] [qemu-mainline test] 105639: regressions - FAIL

flight 105639 qemu-mainline real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/105639/ Regressions :-( Tests which did not succeed and are blocking, including tests which could not be run: build-i386-xsm5 xen-buildfail REGR. vs. 105279 build-amd64

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2] xen/p2m: Fix p2m_flush_table for non-nested cases

At 17:22 + on 08 Feb (1486574546), George Dunlap wrote: > Commit 71bb7304e7a7a35ea6df4b0cedebc35028e4c159 added flushing of > nested p2m tables whenever the host p2m table changed. Unfortunately > in the process, it added a filter to p2m_flush_table() function so > that the p2m would only be

Re: [Xen-devel] [RFC v2 3/6] xen/arm: Allow platform_hvc to handle guest SMC calls

On Wed, Feb 08, 2017 at 04:58:44PM +, Julien Grall wrote: > Hi Tamas, > > On 08/02/17 16:40, Tamas K Lengyel wrote: > >On Wed, Feb 8, 2017 at 1:31 AM, Edgar E. Iglesias > >> wrote: > >On Tue, Feb 07, 2017 at 05:24:03PM -0700,

[Xen-devel] [xen-unstable-smoke test] 105642: tolerable trouble: broken/fail/pass - PUSHED

flight 105642 xen-unstable-smoke real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/105642/ Failures :-/ but no regressions. Tests which did not succeed, but are not blocking: test-arm64-arm64-xl-xsm 1 build-check(1) blocked n/a build-arm64 5

[Xen-devel] [PATCH v2] xen/p2m: Fix p2m_flush_table for non-nested cases

Commit 71bb7304e7a7a35ea6df4b0cedebc35028e4c159 added flushing of nested p2m tables whenever the host p2m table changed. Unfortunately in the process, it added a filter to p2m_flush_table() function so that the p2m would only be flushed if it was being used as a nested p2m. This meant that the

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] common/vm_event: Prevent guest locking with large max_vcpus

On 08/02/17 17:08, Razvan Cojocaru wrote: > On 02/08/2017 06:25 PM, Tamas K Lengyel wrote: >> >> On Wed, Feb 8, 2017 at 2:00 AM, Razvan Cojocaru >> > wrote: >> >> It is currently possible for the guest to lock when subscribing >>

Re: [Xen-devel] [RFC v2 3/6] xen/arm: Allow platform_hvc to handle guest SMC calls

On Wed, Feb 8, 2017 at 9:58 AM, Julien Grall wrote: > Hi Tamas, > > On 08/02/17 16:40, Tamas K Lengyel wrote: > >> On Wed, Feb 8, 2017 at 1:31 AM, Edgar E. Iglesias >> > wrote: >> On Tue, Feb 07, 2017 at

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] x86/mm: Alter is_xen_fixed_mfn() to use mfn_t

On 08/02/17 13:07, Jan Beulich wrote: On 07.02.17 at 19:57, wrote: >> --- a/xen/include/xen/mm.h >> +++ b/xen/include/xen/mm.h >> @@ -599,4 +599,10 @@ static inline void filtered_flush_tlb_mask(uint32_t >> tlbflush_timestamp) >> } >> } >> >> +static inline

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xenbus: Neaten xenbus_va_dev_error

On 02/08/2017 11:05 AM, Joe Perches wrote: > On Wed, 2017-02-08 at 10:33 -0500, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: >> On 02/08/2017 06:33 AM, Joe Perches wrote: >>> This function error patch can be simplified, so do so. >>> >>> Remove fail: label and somewhat obfuscating, used once "error_path" >>> function.

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] common/vm_event: Prevent guest locking with large max_vcpus

On 02/08/2017 06:25 PM, Tamas K Lengyel wrote: > > > On Wed, Feb 8, 2017 at 2:00 AM, Razvan Cojocaru > > wrote: > > It is currently possible for the guest to lock when subscribing > to synchronous vm_events if max_vcpus is

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v6] x86/iommu: add IOMMU entries for p2m_mmio_direct pages

On 07/02/17 17:28, Roger Pau Monne wrote: > There's nothing wrong with allowing the domain to perform DMA transfers to > MMIO areas that it already can access from the CPU, and this allows us to > remove the hack in set_identity_p2m_entry for PVH Dom0. > > Signed-off-by: Roger Pau Monné

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen/mm: Alter is_iomem_page() to use mfn_t

>>> On 08.02.17 at 08:31, wrote: >> From: Jan Beulich [mailto:jbeul...@suse.com] >> Sent: Monday, February 06, 2017 11:38 PM >> >> >>> On 06.02.17 at 15:48, wrote: >> > On Mon, 2017-02-06 at 07:26 -0700, Jan Beulich wrote: >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >

Re: [Xen-devel] [libvirt] [PATCH 2/2] libxl: fix dom0 maximum memory setting

On 02/08/2017 04:06 PM, Jim Fehlig wrote: > Joao Martins wrote: >> On 02/02/2017 10:31 PM, Jim Fehlig wrote: >>> When the libxl driver is initialized, it creates a virDomainDef >>> object for dom0 and adds it to the list of domains. Total memory >>> for dom0 was being set from the max_memkb field

[Xen-devel] [linux-next test] 105633: regressions - FAIL

flight 105633 linux-next real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/105633/ Regressions :-( Tests which did not succeed and are blocking, including tests which could not be run: test-amd64-i386-xl-xsm 17 guest-localmigrate/x10 fail REGR. vs. 105625

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 2/5] xen: credit2: never consider CPUs outside of our cpupool.

>>> On 08.02.17 at 17:48, wrote: > On Fri, 2017-02-03 at 08:40 -0700, Jan Beulich wrote: >> > > > > > On 17.01.17 at 18:26, wrote: >> > > While I did manage to backport "xen: credit2: use the correct >> > > scratch >> > > cpumask" and "xen:

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 0/9] libxl: spolit up libxl.c

And CC Zhangchen On Wed, Feb 08, 2017 at 02:35:27PM +, Wei Liu wrote: > Cc Yi Sun as well. > > Haozhong and Yi: This is just a heads-up -- Juergen from SuSE took the > time to split libxl.c so things are better organised. It's likely this > series will go in before yours, so you will then

Re: [Xen-devel] unmodified drivers

On 08/02/17 17:41, Jan Beulich wrote: On 08.02.17 at 17:32, wrote: >> Is it still appropriate to have the unmodified_drivers subdirectory in >> Xen's git repository? >> >> I think it should be either moved to a separate repository or just >> deleted. > > Having a separate

Re: [Xen-devel] [RFC v2 3/6] xen/arm: Allow platform_hvc to handle guest SMC calls

Hi Tamas, On 08/02/17 16:40, Tamas K Lengyel wrote: On Wed, Feb 8, 2017 at 1:31 AM, Edgar E. Iglesias > wrote: On Tue, Feb 07, 2017 at 05:24:03PM -0700, Tamas K Lengyel wrote: > On Tue, Feb 7, 2017 at 1:51 PM, Julien Grall

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 2/5] xen: credit2: never consider CPUs outside of our cpupool.

On Fri, 2017-02-03 at 08:40 -0700, Jan Beulich wrote: > > > > > > On 17.01.17 at 18:26, wrote: > > > While I did manage to backport "xen: credit2: use the correct > > > scratch > > > cpumask" and "xen: credit2: fix shutdown/suspend when playing > > > with > > >

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v6 05/24] x86: refactor psr: implement Domain init/free and schedule flows.

On Wed, Feb 08, 2017 at 04:15:57PM +0800, Yi Sun wrote: > This patch implements the Domain init/free and schedule flows. > > Signed-off-by: Yi Sun Reviewed-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk ___ Xen-devel

Re: [Xen-devel] unmodified drivers

>>> On 08.02.17 at 17:32, wrote: > Is it still appropriate to have the unmodified_drivers subdirectory in > Xen's git repository? > > I think it should be either moved to a separate repository or just > deleted. Having a separate repo for these few files would seem overkill to

Re: [Xen-devel] [RFC v2 3/6] xen/arm: Allow platform_hvc to handle guest SMC calls

On Wed, Feb 8, 2017 at 1:31 AM, Edgar E. Iglesias wrote: > On Tue, Feb 07, 2017 at 05:24:03PM -0700, Tamas K Lengyel wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 7, 2017 at 1:51 PM, Julien Grall > wrote: > > > > > Hi Tamas, > > > > > > On 07/02/2017 20:38, Tamas K

[Xen-devel] unmodified drivers

Is it still appropriate to have the unmodified_drivers subdirectory in Xen's git repository? I think it should be either moved to a separate repository or just deleted. Having Linux kernel sources in the Xen repository seems to be wrong. Thoughts? Juergen

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] common/vm_event: Prevent guest locking with large max_vcpus

On Wed, Feb 8, 2017 at 2:00 AM, Razvan Cojocaru wrote: > It is currently possible for the guest to lock when subscribing > to synchronous vm_events if max_vcpus is larger than the > number of available ring buffer slots. This patch no longer > blocks already paused

[Xen-devel] [xen-unstable baseline-only test] 68534: regressions - trouble: blocked/broken/fail/pass

This run is configured for baseline tests only. flight 68534 xen-unstable real [real] http://osstest.xs.citrite.net/~osstest/testlogs/logs/68534/ Regressions :-( Tests which did not succeed and are blocking, including tests which could not be run: test-armhf-armhf-libvirt-raw 9

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen/p2m: Remove np2m-specific filter from generic p2m_flush_table

On 08/02/17 10:02, Tim Deegan wrote: > At 03:44 -0700 on 31 Jan (1485834259), Jan Beulich wrote: > On 30.01.17 at 16:17, wrote: >>> Commit 71bb7304e7a7a35ea6df4b0cedebc35028e4c159 added flushing of >>> nested p2m tables whenever the host p2m table changed.

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v6 04/24] x86: refactor psr: implement CPU init and free flow.

.snip.. > +static void free_feature(struct psr_socket_info *info) > +{ > +struct feat_node *feat, *next; > + > +if ( !info ) > +return; > + > +/* > + * Free resources of features. But we do not free global feature list > + * entry, like feat_l3_cat. Although it may

[Xen-devel] [ovmf test] 105636: all pass - PUSHED

flight 105636 ovmf real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/105636/ Perfect :-) All tests in this flight passed as required version targeted for testing: ovmf 9fe9cf9acb475af9317dcdaf32a93f1cb77d95ac baseline version: ovmf

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 0/9] libxl: spolit up libxl.c

On 08/02/17 17:12, Ian Jackson wrote: > Juergen Gross writes ("Re: [PATCH 0/9] libxl: spolit up libxl.c"): >> Okay, more precise wording: > > Thanks. > >> Changes are: >> - moving functions into new or existing sources >> - modification of Copyright comment > >> - made two functions non-static:

Re: [Xen-devel] Enabling vm_event for a guest with more VCPUs than available ring buffer slots freezes the virtual machine

On Tue, Feb 7, 2017 at 11:48 PM, Razvan Cojocaru wrote: > On 02/08/2017 01:23 AM, Tamas K Lengyel wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, Feb 7, 2017 at 1:41 PM, Razvan Cojocaru > > > wrote: > > > > On 02/07/2017

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 2/2] tools/libxl: Introduce LIBXL_CPUPOOL_POOLID_ANY

On 08/02/17 16:11, Dario Faggioli wrote: > On Wed, 2017-02-08 at 14:51 +, George Dunlap wrote: >> Callers to libxl_cpupool_create() can either request a specific pool >> id, or request that Xen do it for them. But at the moment, the >> "automatic" selection is indicated by using a magic

  1   2   3   >