Re: [PATCH] xen/blkback: add missing MODULE_DESCRIPTION() macro

2024-07-09 Thread Jens Axboe
On Sun, 02 Jun 2024 17:37:28 -0700, Jeff Johnson wrote: > make allmodconfig && make W=1 C=1 reports: > WARNING: modpost: missing MODULE_DESCRIPTION() in > drivers/block/xen-blkback/xen-blkback.o > > Add the missing invocation of the MODULE_DESCRIPTION() macro. > > Applied, thanks! [1/1] xen

[xen-unstable test] 186745: tolerable FAIL - PUSHED

2024-07-09 Thread osstest service owner
flight 186745 xen-unstable real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/186745/ Failures :-/ but no regressions. Tests which did not succeed, but are not blocking: test-amd64-amd64-xl-qemut-win7-amd64 19 guest-stopfail like 186739 test-amd64-amd64-xl-qemuu-ws16-amd64

Re: [PATCH v3 1/1] swiotlb: Reduce swiotlb pool lookups

2024-07-09 Thread Christoph Hellwig
On Tue, Jul 09, 2024 at 09:08:18PM +0200, Petr Tesařík wrote: > I'm confused. If you're not a big fan, why are we effectively adding > them to more places now than before the patch? Because I didn't want to second guess the patch author too much.

[linux-linus test] 186742: regressions - FAIL

2024-07-09 Thread osstest service owner
flight 186742 linux-linus real [real] flight 186747 linux-linus real-retest [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/186742/ http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/186747/ Regressions :-( Tests which did not succeed and are blocking, including tests which could not be run

[ovmf test] 186746: all pass - PUSHED

2024-07-09 Thread osstest service owner
flight 186746 ovmf real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/186746/ Perfect :-) All tests in this flight passed as required version targeted for testing: ovmf f91211049c1522f7db2ae8f7a509ac270868d0e9 baseline version: ovmf 7aaee521a1966e71a51b7

[PATCH] xen/arm: Convert comma to semicolon

2024-07-09 Thread Chen Ni
Replace a comma between expression statements by a semicolon. Signed-off-by: Chen Ni --- arch/arm/xen/p2m.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/arch/arm/xen/p2m.c b/arch/arm/xen/p2m.c index 309648c17f48..9da57a5b81c7 100644 --- a/arch/arm/xen/p2m.c +++ b/arch/arm/

Re: [PATCH for-4.20] automation: Use a different ImageBuilder repository URL

2024-07-09 Thread Stefano Stabellini
On Tue, 9 Jul 2024, Alejandro Vallejo wrote: > On Tue Jul 9, 2024 at 1:21 PM BST, Michal Orzel wrote: > > Switch to using https://gitlab.com/xen-project/imagebuilder.git which > > should be considered official ImageBuilder repo. > > > > Signed-off-by: Michal Orzel > > --- > > automation/scripts/q

[xen-unstable test] 186739: tolerable FAIL

2024-07-09 Thread osstest service owner
flight 186739 xen-unstable real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/186739/ Failures :-/ but no regressions. Tests which did not succeed, but are not blocking: test-amd64-amd64-xl-qemut-win7-amd64 19 guest-stopfail like 186735 test-amd64-amd64-xl-qemuu-ws16-amd64

[xen-unstable-smoke test] 186743: tolerable all pass - PUSHED

2024-07-09 Thread osstest service owner
flight 186743 xen-unstable-smoke real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/186743/ Failures :-/ but no regressions. Tests which did not succeed, but are not blocking: test-amd64-amd64-libvirt 15 migrate-support-checkfail never pass test-arm64-arm64-xl-xsm 1

Re: [PATCH] xen/blkback: add missing MODULE_DESCRIPTION() macro

2024-07-09 Thread Jeff Johnson
On 6/2/2024 5:37 PM, Jeff Johnson wrote: > make allmodconfig && make W=1 C=1 reports: > WARNING: modpost: missing MODULE_DESCRIPTION() in > drivers/block/xen-blkback/xen-blkback.o > > Add the missing invocation of the MODULE_DESCRIPTION() macro. > > Signed-off-by: Jeff Johnson > --- > drivers/

[ovmf test] 186744: all pass - PUSHED

2024-07-09 Thread osstest service owner
flight 186744 ovmf real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/186744/ Perfect :-) All tests in this flight passed as required version targeted for testing: ovmf 7aaee521a1966e71a51b71b73f5e3bbddb6faa31 baseline version: ovmf 426b69830efff788f2c17

Re: [PATCH v3 1/1] swiotlb: Reduce swiotlb pool lookups

2024-07-09 Thread Petr Tesařík
On Tue, 9 Jul 2024 13:18:12 +0200 Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Tue, Jul 09, 2024 at 11:10:13AM +0200, Petr Tesařík wrote: > > Reviewed-by: Petr Tesarik > > Thanks. > > > > > OK, so __swiotlb_find_pool() is now always declared (so the code > > compiles), but if CONFIG_SWIOTLB_DYNAMIC=n, it

[xen-unstable-smoke test] 186741: tolerable all pass - PUSHED

2024-07-09 Thread osstest service owner
flight 186741 xen-unstable-smoke real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/186741/ Failures :-/ but no regressions. Tests which did not succeed, but are not blocking: test-amd64-amd64-libvirt 15 migrate-support-checkfail never pass test-arm64-arm64-xl-xsm 1

Re: Build system mess in stubdom

2024-07-09 Thread Andrew Cooper
On 09/07/2024 4:34 pm, Anthony PERARD wrote: > On Tue, Jul 09, 2024 at 02:49:57PM +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote: >> Hello, >> >> I'm trying to investigate why stubdom/ is fatally failing now with a >> rebuilt ArchLinux container (GCC 14). >> >> It is ultimately: >> >>> ../../../../../newlib-1.16.0/new

Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] Add libfuzzer target to fuzz/x86_instruction_emulator

2024-07-09 Thread Tamas K Lengyel
On Tue, Jul 9, 2024 at 12:12 PM Jan Beulich wrote: > > On 09.07.2024 17:37, Tamas K Lengyel wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 6:47 PM Tamas K Lengyel wrote: > >> > >> This target enables integration into oss-fuzz. Changing invalid input > >> return > >> to -1 as values other then 0/-1 are reser

Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] Add libfuzzer target to fuzz/x86_instruction_emulator

2024-07-09 Thread Jan Beulich
On 09.07.2024 17:37, Tamas K Lengyel wrote: > On Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 6:47 PM Tamas K Lengyel wrote: >> >> This target enables integration into oss-fuzz. Changing invalid input return >> to -1 as values other then 0/-1 are reserved by libfuzzer. Also adding the >> missing __wrap_vsnprintf wrapper

Re: [XEN PATCH for-4.19] xen/bitmap: amend MISRA C deviation for Rule 20.7

2024-07-09 Thread Jan Beulich
On 09.07.2024 11:34, Nicola Vetrini wrote: > --- a/xen/include/xen/bitmap.h > +++ b/xen/include/xen/bitmap.h > @@ -103,18 +103,16 @@ extern int bitmap_allocate_region(unsigned long > *bitmap, int pos, int order); > #define bitmap_switch(nbits, zero, small, large) \ > u

[PATCH for-4.20 0/4] x86: FPU handling cleanup

2024-07-09 Thread Alejandro Vallejo
I want to eventually reach a position in which the FPU state can be allocated from the domheap and hidden via the same core mechanism proposed in Elias' directmap removal series. Doing so is complicated by the presence of 2 aliased pointers (v->arch.fpu_ctxt and v->arch.xsave_area) and the rather c

[PATCH for-4.20 2/4] x86/fpu: Create a typedef for the x87/SSE area inside "struct xsave_struct"

2024-07-09 Thread Alejandro Vallejo
Making the union non-anonymous causes a lot of headaches, because a lot of code relies on it being so, but it's possible to make a typedef of the anonymous union so all callsites currently relying on typeof() can stop doing so directly. This commit creates a `fpusse_t` typedef to the anonymous uni

[PATCH for-4.20 3/4] x86/fpu: Combine fpu_ctxt and xsave_area in arch_vcpu

2024-07-09 Thread Alejandro Vallejo
fpu_ctxt is either a pointer to the legacy x87/SSE save area (used by FXSAVE) or a pointer aliased with xsave_area that points to its fpu_sse subfield. Such subfield is at the base and is identical in size and layout to the legacy buffer. This patch merges the 2 pointers in the arch_vcpu into a si

[PATCH for-4.20 4/4] x86/fpu: Split fpu_setup_fpu() in two

2024-07-09 Thread Alejandro Vallejo
It's doing too many things at once and there's no clear way of defining what it's meant to do. This patch splits the function in two. 1. A reset function, parameterized by the FCW value. FCW_RESET means to reset the state to power-on reset values, while FCW_DEFAULT means to reset to the

[PATCH for-4.20 1/4] x86/xstate: Use compression check helper in xstate_all()

2024-07-09 Thread Alejandro Vallejo
Minor refactor to make xstate_all() use a helper rather than poking directly into the XSAVE header. No functional change Signed-off-by: Alejandro Vallejo --- xen/arch/x86/include/asm/xstate.h | 15 +++ 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/includ

[linux-linus test] 186738: regressions - FAIL

2024-07-09 Thread osstest service owner
flight 186738 linux-linus real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/186738/ Regressions :-( Tests which did not succeed and are blocking, including tests which could not be run: test-armhf-armhf-xl-raw 8 xen-boot fail REGR. vs. 186727 test-armhf-armhf-xl

Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] Add libfuzzer target to fuzz/x86_instruction_emulator

2024-07-09 Thread Tamas K Lengyel
On Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 6:47 PM Tamas K Lengyel wrote: > > This target enables integration into oss-fuzz. Changing invalid input return > to -1 as values other then 0/-1 are reserved by libfuzzer. Also adding the > missing __wrap_vsnprintf wrapper which is required for successful oss-fuzz > build.

Re: Build system mess in stubdom

2024-07-09 Thread Anthony PERARD
On Tue, Jul 09, 2024 at 02:49:57PM +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote: > Hello, > > I'm trying to investigate why stubdom/ is fatally failing now with a > rebuilt ArchLinux container (GCC 14). > > It is ultimately: > > > ../../../../../newlib-1.16.0/newlib/libc/reent/signalr.c:61:14: error: > > implicit de

Re: Build system mess in stubdom

2024-07-09 Thread Charles Arnold
On 7/9/24 8:55 AM, Jan Beulich wrote: On 09.07.2024 15:49, Andrew Cooper wrote: I'm trying to investigate why stubdom/ is fatally failing now with a rebuilt ArchLinux container (GCC 14). It is ultimately: ../../../../../newlib-1.16.0/newlib/libc/reent/signalr.c:61:14: error: implicit declarat

Re: Build system mess in stubdom

2024-07-09 Thread Andrew Cooper
On 09/07/2024 3:55 pm, Jan Beulich wrote: > On 09.07.2024 15:49, Andrew Cooper wrote: >> I'm trying to investigate why stubdom/ is fatally failing now with a >> rebuilt ArchLinux container (GCC 14). >> >> It is ultimately: >> >>> ../../../../../newlib-1.16.0/newlib/libc/reent/signalr.c:61:14: error

[ovmf test] 186740: all pass - PUSHED

2024-07-09 Thread osstest service owner
flight 186740 ovmf real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/186740/ Perfect :-) All tests in this flight passed as required version targeted for testing: ovmf 426b69830efff788f2c17a4b920a84d6e08739c8 baseline version: ovmf 95a6892aacfef6c786205

Re: Build system mess in stubdom

2024-07-09 Thread Jan Beulich
On 09.07.2024 15:49, Andrew Cooper wrote: > I'm trying to investigate why stubdom/ is fatally failing now with a > rebuilt ArchLinux container (GCC 14). > > It is ultimately: > >> ../../../../../newlib-1.16.0/newlib/libc/reent/signalr.c:61:14: error: >> implicit declaration of function ‘kill’; di

Re: [PATCH for-4.19?] stubdom: Remove more leftovers of caml-stubdom

2024-07-09 Thread Jürgen Groß
On 09.07.24 14:39, Andrew Cooper wrote: Fixes: e536a497545f ("stubdom: Remove caml-stubdom") Signed-off-by: Andrew Cooper Reviewed-by: Juergen Gross Juergen

Re: [PATCH for-4.19?] stubdom: Remove more leftovers of caml-stubdom

2024-07-09 Thread Oleksii
On Tue, 2024-07-09 at 13:39 +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote: > Fixes: e536a497545f ("stubdom: Remove caml-stubdom") > Signed-off-by: Andrew Cooper > --- > CC: Juergen Gross > CC: Oleksii Kurochko > > For 4.19.  This is additional tidying to a removal in 4.19, which > will > otherwise need backportin

Re: Build system mess in stubdom

2024-07-09 Thread Andrew Cooper
[Correct Anthony's email] ~Andrew On 09/07/2024 2:49 pm, Andrew Cooper wrote: > Hello, > > I'm trying to investigate why stubdom/ is fatally failing now with a > rebuilt ArchLinux container (GCC 14). > > It is ultimately: > >> ../../../../../newlib-1.16.0/newlib/libc/reent/signalr.c:61:14: error:

Build system mess in stubdom

2024-07-09 Thread Andrew Cooper
Hello, I'm trying to investigate why stubdom/ is fatally failing now with a rebuilt ArchLinux container (GCC 14). It is ultimately: > ../../../../../newlib-1.16.0/newlib/libc/reent/signalr.c:61:14: error: > implicit declaration of function ‘kill’; did you mean ‘_kill’? > [-Wimplicit-function-dec

Xen 4.19-rc2

2024-07-09 Thread Oleksii
Hi all, Xen 4.19-rc2 is tagged. You can check that out from xen.git: git://xenbits.xen.org/xen.git 4.19.0-rc2 For your convenience there is also a tarball and the signature at: https://downloads.xenproject.org/release/xen/4.19.0-rc2/xen-4.19.0-rc2.tar.gz And the signature is at: https://downloa

Re: [XEN PATCH v12 5/7] tools/libxc: Allow gsi be mapped into a free pirq

2024-07-09 Thread Jan Beulich
On 08.07.2024 13:41, Jiqian Chen wrote: > Hypercall PHYSDEVOP_map_pirq support to map a gsi into a specific > pirq or a free pirq, it depends on the parameter pirq(>0 or <0). > But in current xc_physdev_map_pirq, it set *pirq=index when > parameter pirq is <0, it causes to force all cases to be map

Re: [XEN PATCH v12 4/7] x86/domctl: Add hypercall to set the access of x86 gsi

2024-07-09 Thread Jan Beulich
On 08.07.2024 13:41, Jiqian Chen wrote: > Some type of domains don't have PIRQs, like PVH, it doesn't do > PHYSDEVOP_map_pirq for each gsi. When passthrough a device > to guest base on PVH dom0, callstack > pci_add_dm_done->XEN_DOMCTL_irq_permission will fail at function > domain_pirq_to_irq, becau

Re: Problems in PV dom0 on recent x86 hardware

2024-07-09 Thread Jason Andryuk
On 2024-07-09 06:56, Jürgen Groß wrote: On 09.07.24 09:01, Jan Beulich wrote: On 09.07.2024 08:36, Jürgen Groß wrote: On 09.07.24 08:24, Jan Beulich wrote: On 08.07.2024 23:30, Jason Andryuk wrote:    From the backtrace, it looks like the immediate case is just trying to read a 4-byte versio

Re: [PATCH for-4.20] automation: Use a different ImageBuilder repository URL

2024-07-09 Thread Alejandro Vallejo
On Tue Jul 9, 2024 at 1:21 PM BST, Michal Orzel wrote: > Switch to using https://gitlab.com/xen-project/imagebuilder.git which > should be considered official ImageBuilder repo. > > Signed-off-by: Michal Orzel > --- > automation/scripts/qemu-smoke-dom0-arm32.sh | 2 +- > automation/scripts/

[PATCH for-4.19?] stubdom: Remove more leftovers of caml-stubdom

2024-07-09 Thread Andrew Cooper
Fixes: e536a497545f ("stubdom: Remove caml-stubdom") Signed-off-by: Andrew Cooper --- CC: Juergen Gross CC: Oleksii Kurochko For 4.19. This is additional tidying to a removal in 4.19, which will otherwise need backporting if it misses 4.19. --- config/Stubdom.mk.in | 3 --- 1 file changed, 3

[PATCH for-4.20] automation: Use a different ImageBuilder repository URL

2024-07-09 Thread Michal Orzel
Switch to using https://gitlab.com/xen-project/imagebuilder.git which should be considered official ImageBuilder repo. Signed-off-by: Michal Orzel --- automation/scripts/qemu-smoke-dom0-arm32.sh | 2 +- automation/scripts/qemu-smoke-dom0-arm64.sh | 2 +- automation/scripts/qemu-smoke

Re: [PATCH v3 1/1] swiotlb: Reduce swiotlb pool lookups

2024-07-09 Thread Christoph Hellwig
On Tue, Jul 09, 2024 at 11:48:08AM +, Michael Kelley wrote: > Your tweaks look fine to me. Evidently I misunderstood your > preference in our previous exchange about #ifdef vs. IS_ENABLED() > in swiotlb_find_pool(), and the effect on dma_uses_io_tlb. Actually I actively mislead you. Yes, I pr

RE: [PATCH v3 1/1] swiotlb: Reduce swiotlb pool lookups

2024-07-09 Thread Michael Kelley
From: Christoph Hellwig Sent: Monday, July 8, 2024 11:26 PM > > Hi Michael, > > I've applied this, but I've made a few changes before that directly as > we're getting close to the end of the merge window. > > Most of it is very slight formatting tweaks, but I've also kept the > dma_uses_io_tlb

Re: [RFC XEN PATCH] x86/cpuid: Expose max_vcpus field in HVM hypervisor leaf

2024-07-09 Thread Jan Beulich
On 09.07.2024 13:11, Alejandro Vallejo wrote: > I'll pitch in, seeing as I created the GitLab ticket. > > On Tue Jul 9, 2024 at 7:40 AM BST, Jan Beulich wrote: >> On 08.07.2024 17:42, Matthew Barnes wrote: >>> Currently, OVMF is hard-coded to set up a maximum of 64 vCPUs on >>> startup. >>> >>> Th

Re: [XEN PATCH v3 09/12] x86/mm: add defensive return

2024-07-09 Thread Jan Beulich
On 09.07.2024 13:21, Alejandro Vallejo wrote: > On Mon Jul 1, 2024 at 9:57 AM BST, Jan Beulich wrote: >> On 26.06.2024 11:28, Federico Serafini wrote: >>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/mm.c >>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/mm.c >>> @@ -916,6 +916,7 @@ get_page_from_l1e( >>> return 0; >>> d

Re: [XEN PATCH v3 09/12] x86/mm: add defensive return

2024-07-09 Thread Alejandro Vallejo
On Mon Jul 1, 2024 at 9:57 AM BST, Jan Beulich wrote: > On 26.06.2024 11:28, Federico Serafini wrote: > > Add defensive return statement at the end of an unreachable > > default case. Other than improve safety, this meets the requirements > > to deviate a violation of MISRA C Rule 16.3: "An uncondi

Re: [PATCH v3 1/1] swiotlb: Reduce swiotlb pool lookups

2024-07-09 Thread Christoph Hellwig
On Tue, Jul 09, 2024 at 11:10:13AM +0200, Petr Tesařík wrote: > Reviewed-by: Petr Tesarik Thanks. > > OK, so __swiotlb_find_pool() is now always declared (so the code > compiles), but if CONFIG_SWIOTLB_DYNAMIC=n, it is never defined. The > result still links, because the compiler optimizes away

Re: [RFC XEN PATCH] x86/cpuid: Expose max_vcpus field in HVM hypervisor leaf

2024-07-09 Thread Alejandro Vallejo
I'll pitch in, seeing as I created the GitLab ticket. On Tue Jul 9, 2024 at 7:40 AM BST, Jan Beulich wrote: > On 08.07.2024 17:42, Matthew Barnes wrote: > > Currently, OVMF is hard-coded to set up a maximum of 64 vCPUs on > > startup. > > > > There are efforts to support a maximum of 128 vCPUs, w

Re: Problems in PV dom0 on recent x86 hardware

2024-07-09 Thread Jürgen Groß
On 09.07.24 09:01, Jan Beulich wrote: On 09.07.2024 08:36, Jürgen Groß wrote: On 09.07.24 08:24, Jan Beulich wrote: On 08.07.2024 23:30, Jason Andryuk wrote: From the backtrace, it looks like the immediate case is just trying to read a 4-byte version: [ 44.575541] ucsi_acpi_dsm+

Re: [PATCH 2/2] ppc/shutdown: Implement machine_{halt,restart}()

2024-07-09 Thread Andrew Cooper
On 08/07/2024 10:21 pm, Shawn Anastasio wrote: >> +do { >> +rc = opal_cec_reboot(); >> + >> +if ( rc == OPAL_BUSY_EVENT ) >> +opal_poll_events(NULL); >> + >> +} while ( rc == OPAL_BUSY || rc == OPAL_BUSY_EVENT ); >> + >> +for ( ;; ) >> +opal_poll_even

Re: [XEN PATCH for-4.19] xen/bitmap: amend MISRA C deviation for Rule 20.7

2024-07-09 Thread Jan Beulich
On 09.07.2024 12:15, Nicola Vetrini wrote: > On 2024-07-09 11:40, Jan Beulich wrote: >> On 09.07.2024 11:34, Nicola Vetrini wrote: >>> As noticed in the gitlab analyses, deviating bitmap_switch >>> for Rule 20.7 in this way does not work for ECLAIR. >>> >>> Instead, the deviation should be put in t

[xen-unstable test] 186735: tolerable FAIL - PUSHED

2024-07-09 Thread osstest service owner
flight 186735 xen-unstable real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/186735/ Failures :-/ but no regressions. Tests which did not succeed, but are not blocking: test-amd64-amd64-xl-qemut-win7-amd64 19 guest-stopfail like 186733 test-amd64-amd64-xl-qemuu-ws16-amd64

[libvirt test] 186736: trouble: broken/pass

2024-07-09 Thread osstest service owner
flight 186736 libvirt real [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/186736/ Failures and problems with tests :-( Tests which did not succeed and are blocking, including tests which could not be run: test-armhf-armhf-libvirt broken test-armhf-armhf-libvirt

Re: [XEN PATCH for-4.19] xen/bitmap: amend MISRA C deviation for Rule 20.7

2024-07-09 Thread Nicola Vetrini
On 2024-07-09 11:40, Jan Beulich wrote: On 09.07.2024 11:34, Nicola Vetrini wrote: As noticed in the gitlab analyses, deviating bitmap_switch for Rule 20.7 in this way does not work for ECLAIR. Instead, the deviation should be put in the macro invocation. Why is this? I ask in particular beca

Re: [PATCH for-4.19 0/4] CI: part 3 (improvments to PPC)

2024-07-09 Thread Andrew Cooper
On 09/07/2024 7:31 am, Jan Beulich wrote: > On 08.07.2024 19:35, Andrew Cooper wrote: >> Here is a run with these improvements in place: >> >> https://gitlab.com/xen-project/people/andyhhp/xen/-/jobs/7277624801 >> >> Jan: I hope to backport this series to 4.18 so we can remove >> qemu-system-ppc6

Re: [XEN PATCH v2 1/2] x86/cpufreq: move ACPI cpufreq driver into separate file

2024-07-09 Thread Jan Beulich
On 09.07.2024 11:13, Sergiy Kibrik wrote: > 03.07.24 18:07, Jan Beulich: >> On 01.07.2024 14:03, Sergiy Kibrik wrote: >>> --- /dev/null >>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/acpi/cpufreq/acpi.c >>> @@ -0,0 +1,622 @@ >>> +/* >>> + * cpufreq.c - ACPI Processor P-States Driver ($Revision: 1.4 $) >>> + * >>> + * Co

Re: [XEN PATCH for-4.19] xen/bitmap: amend MISRA C deviation for Rule 20.7

2024-07-09 Thread Jan Beulich
On 09.07.2024 11:34, Nicola Vetrini wrote: > As noticed in the gitlab analyses, deviating bitmap_switch > for Rule 20.7 in this way does not work for ECLAIR. > > Instead, the deviation should be put in the macro invocation. Why is this? I ask in particular because ... > --- a/xen/include/xen/bit

Re: AMD EPYC virtual network performances

2024-07-09 Thread Jürgen Groß
On 09.07.24 10:36, Andrei Semenov wrote: Hello, As been reported by David Morel (mail 4 Jan 2024), our customers experience a very poor virtual network performances in HVM guests on AMD EPYC platforms. After some investigations we notices a huge performances drop (perfs divided by factor of 5)

[XEN PATCH for-4.19] xen/bitmap: amend MISRA C deviation for Rule 20.7

2024-07-09 Thread Nicola Vetrini
As noticed in the gitlab analyses, deviating bitmap_switch for Rule 20.7 in this way does not work for ECLAIR. Instead, the deviation should be put in the macro invocation. No functional change. Fixes: 0dca0f2b9a7e ("automation/eclair: address violations of MISRA C Rule 20.7") Signed-off-by: Ni

Re: [XEN PATCH v2 2/2] x86/cpufreq: separate powernow/hwp/acpi cpufreq code

2024-07-09 Thread Sergiy Kibrik
03.07.24 18:14, Jan Beulich: On 01.07.2024 14:19, Sergiy Kibrik wrote: --- a/xen/drivers/acpi/pmstat.c +++ b/xen/drivers/acpi/pmstat.c @@ -255,7 +255,7 @@ static int get_cpufreq_para(struct xen_sysctl_pm_op *op) strlcpy(op->u.get_para.scaling_driver, "Unknown", CPUFREQ_NAME_LEN);

[linux-linus test] 186734: regressions - FAIL

2024-07-09 Thread osstest service owner
flight 186734 linux-linus real [real] flight 186737 linux-linus real-retest [real] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/186734/ http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/186737/ Regressions :-( Tests which did not succeed and are blocking, including tests which could not be run

Re: [XEN PATCH v2 1/2] x86/cpufreq: move ACPI cpufreq driver into separate file

2024-07-09 Thread Sergiy Kibrik
03.07.24 18:07, Jan Beulich: On 01.07.2024 14:03, Sergiy Kibrik wrote: Separate ACPI driver from generic initialization cpufreq code. This way acpi-cpufreq can become optional in the future and be disabled from non-Intel builds. Other than acpi_register_driver() helper added and clean up a list

Re: [PATCH v3 1/1] swiotlb: Reduce swiotlb pool lookups

2024-07-09 Thread Petr Tesařík
On Mon, 8 Jul 2024 12:41:00 -0700 mhkelle...@gmail.com wrote: > From: Michael Kelley > > With CONFIG_SWIOTLB_DYNAMIC enabled, each round-trip map/unmap pair > in the swiotlb results in 6 calls to swiotlb_find_pool(). In multiple > places, the pool is found and used in one function, and then mus

Re: [XEN PATCH v2] x86/intel: optional build of TSX support

2024-07-09 Thread Sergiy Kibrik
03.07.24 17:58, Jan Beulich: On 01.07.2024 10:25, Sergiy Kibrik wrote: Transactional Synchronization Extensions are supported on certain Intel's CPUs only, hence can be put under CONFIG_INTEL build option. The whole TSX support, even if supported by CPU, may need to be disabled via options, by

AMD EPYC virtual network performances

2024-07-09 Thread Andrei Semenov
Hello, As been reported by David Morel (mail 4 Jan 2024), our customers experience a very poor virtual network performances in HVM guests on AMD EPYC platforms. After some investigations we notices a huge performances drop (perfs divided by factor of 5) starting from 5.10.88 Linux kernel version

Re: [PATCH 05/17] xen/x86: address violations of MISRA C:2012 Directive 4.10

2024-07-09 Thread Jan Beulich
On 09.07.2024 09:38, Alessandro Zucchelli wrote: > On 2024-07-01 16:21, Jan Beulich wrote: >> On 01.07.2024 15:36, Alessandro Zucchelli wrote: >>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/Makefile >>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/Makefile >>> @@ -260,17 +260,18 @@ $(objtree)/arch/x86/include/asm/asm-macros.h: >>> $(obj)/asm-macr

Re: [PATCH 05/17] xen/x86: address violations of MISRA C:2012 Directive 4.10

2024-07-09 Thread Alessandro Zucchelli
On 2024-07-01 16:21, Jan Beulich wrote: On 01.07.2024 15:36, Alessandro Zucchelli wrote: --- a/xen/arch/x86/Makefile +++ b/xen/arch/x86/Makefile @@ -260,17 +260,18 @@ $(objtree)/arch/x86/include/asm/asm-macros.h: $(obj)/asm-macros.i $(src)/Makefil $(call filechk,asm-macros.h) define

Re: Problems in PV dom0 on recent x86 hardware

2024-07-09 Thread Jan Beulich
On 09.07.2024 09:13, Roger Pau Monné wrote: > On Tue, Jul 09, 2024 at 08:24:20AM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote: >> On 08.07.2024 23:30, Jason Andryuk wrote: >>> On 2024-07-08 05:12, Jan Beulich wrote: On 08.07.2024 11:08, Roger Pau Monné wrote: > On Mon, Jul 08, 2024 at 10:37:22AM +0200, Jan Be

Re: [XEN PATCH v4 12/14] x86/ioreq: guard VIO_realmode_completion with CONFIG_VMX

2024-07-09 Thread Jan Beulich
On 09.07.2024 08:09, Sergiy Kibrik wrote: > --- a/xen/arch/x86/include/asm/hvm/ioreq.h > +++ b/xen/arch/x86/include/asm/hvm/ioreq.h > @@ -13,6 +13,11 @@ > #define IOREQ_STATUS_UNHANDLED X86EMUL_UNHANDLEABLE > #define IOREQ_STATUS_RETRY X86EMUL_RETRY > > +#ifdef CONFIG_VMX > +bool arch_v

Re: [XEN PATCH v4 06/14] x86/p2m: guard EPT functions with using_vmx() check

2024-07-09 Thread Jan Beulich
On 09.07.2024 07:56, Sergiy Kibrik wrote: > From: Xenia Ragiadakou > > Replace cpu_has_vmx check with using_vmx(), so that we do check if functions > ept_p2m_init() and ept_p2m_uninit() can be called. I still find this an odd way of putting it. Source code ... > --- a/xen/arch/x86/mm/p2m-basic.

Re: [XEN PATCH v4 05/14] x86: introduce using_{svm,vmx}() helpers

2024-07-09 Thread Jan Beulich
On 09.07.2024 07:54, Sergiy Kibrik wrote: > As we now have SVM/VMX config options for enabling/disabling these features > completely in the build, we need some build-time checks to ensure that vmx/svm > code can be used and things compile. Macros cpu_has_{svm,vmx} used to be doing > such checks at

Re: [XEN PATCH v4 04/14] x86: introduce CONFIG_ALTP2M Kconfig option

2024-07-09 Thread Jan Beulich
On 09.07.2024 07:52, Sergiy Kibrik wrote: > Add new option to make altp2m code inclusion optional. > Currently altp2m implemented for Intel EPT only, so option is dependant on > VMX. > Also the prompt itself depends on EXPERT=y, so that option is available > for fine-tuning, if one want to play ar

Re: Problems in PV dom0 on recent x86 hardware

2024-07-09 Thread Roger Pau Monné
On Tue, Jul 09, 2024 at 08:24:20AM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote: > On 08.07.2024 23:30, Jason Andryuk wrote: > > On 2024-07-08 05:12, Jan Beulich wrote: > >> On 08.07.2024 11:08, Roger Pau Monné wrote: > >>> On Mon, Jul 08, 2024 at 10:37:22AM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote: > On 08.07.2024 10:15, Jürgen

Re: [XEN PATCH v4 01/14] x86: introduce AMD-V and Intel VT-x Kconfig options

2024-07-09 Thread Jan Beulich
On 09.07.2024 07:45, Sergiy Kibrik wrote: > From: Xenia Ragiadakou > > Introduce two new Kconfig options, SVM and VMX, to allow code > specific to each virtualization technology to be separated and, when not > required, stripped. > CONFIG_SVM will be used to enable virtual machine extensions on p

Re: [XEN PATCH v4 02/14] x86/altp2m: add static inline stub for altp2m_vcpu_idx()

2024-07-09 Thread Jan Beulich
On 09.07.2024 07:48, Sergiy Kibrik wrote: > The stub just returns 0 due to implementation of p2m_get_mem_access() for > x86 & ARM expects it to be 0 when altp2m not active or not implemented. > > The separate stub is favoured over dynamic check for alt2pm availability > inside regular altp2m_vcpu

Re: [XEN PATCH v4 03/14] x86/p2m: guard altp2m routines

2024-07-09 Thread Jan Beulich
On 09.07.2024 07:50, Sergiy Kibrik wrote: > Initialize and bring down altp2m only when it is supported by the platform, > e.g. VMX. Also guard p2m_altp2m_propagate_change(). > The purpose of that is the possibility to disable altp2m support and exclude > its > code from the build completely, when

Re: Problems in PV dom0 on recent x86 hardware

2024-07-09 Thread Jan Beulich
On 09.07.2024 08:36, Jürgen Groß wrote: > On 09.07.24 08:24, Jan Beulich wrote: >> On 08.07.2024 23:30, Jason Andryuk wrote: >>> From the backtrace, it looks like the immediate case is just trying to >>> read a 4-byte version: >>> >>> [ 44.575541] ucsi_acpi_dsm+0x53/0x80 >>> [