On Thu, 26 Mar 2015, Andrew Jones wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 10:44:42AM +0100, Andrew Jones wrote:
> > Hello ARM virt maintainers,
> >
> > I'd like to start a discussion about supporting virt-what[1]. virt-what
> > allows userspace to determine if the system it's running on is running
> > in
On Wed, 25 Mar 2015, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Wed, 2015-03-25 at 10:44 +0100, Andrew Jones wrote:
> > Hello ARM virt maintainers,
> >
> > I'd like to start a discussion about supporting virt-what[1]. virt-what
> > allows userspace to determine if the system it's running on is running
> > in a gues
On Fri, 23 Jan 2015, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 11:33:45AM -0800, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> > From: "Luis R. Rodriguez"
> >
> > This v3 addresses Stefano's feedback from the v2 series, namely
> > moving PCI stuff to x86 as its all x86 specific and also just
> > removing t
engguang...@intel.com
> Cc: David Vrabel
> Cc: Ian Campbell
> Cc: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
> Cc: xen-de...@lists.xenproject.org
> Acked-by: Julien Grall
> Reviewed-by: Josh Triplett
> Signed-off-by: Luis R. Rodriguez
Acked-by: Stefano Stabellini
> arch/x86/configs/xen.config | 10
On Tue, 13 Jan 2015, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 02:58:26PM +0000, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > On Tue, 9 Dec 2014, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> > > From: "Luis R. Rodriguez"
> > >
> > > This lets you build a kernel which ca
On Tue, 9 Dec 2014, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> From: "Luis R. Rodriguez"
>
> This lets you build a kernel which can support xen dom0
> or xen guests by just using:
>
>make xenconfig
>
> on both x86 and arm64 kernels. This also splits out the
> options which are available currently to be bui
On Mon, 30 Jun 2014, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 30 June 2014 21:46, Christoffer Dall wrote:
> > Seems like we should stick a note in there about being UEFI compatible
> > requires an RTC. We went this far before Peter raised the issue with
> > noone else realizing it, so it seems like a good idea
Although not in the ARM VM System Specification, Xen is certainly going
to support a fast boot path without UEFI firmware. I guess KVM will too.
You'll have to rely on hypervisor specific mechanisms to achieve it.
In fact I wouldn't worry about UEFI when you need ACPI, that is not in
this specific
On Fri, 28 Feb 2014, Alexander Graf wrote:
> > We will however want to boot all sorts of guests in a standardized
> > virtual environment:
> >
> > * 32 bit Linux (since some distros don't support biarch or multiarch
> > on arm64) for running applications that are either binary-only
> > or not 64
On Wed, 26 Feb 2014, Leif Lindholm wrote:
> > > no FDT. In this case, the VM implementation must provide ACPI, and
> > > the OS must be able to locate the ACPI root pointer through the UEFI
> > > system table.
> > >
> > > For more information about the arm and arm64 boot conventions, see
>
On Wed, 26 Feb 2014, Grant Likely wrote:
> > VM Platform
> > ---
> > The specification does not mandate any specific memory map. The guest
> > OS must be able to enumerate all processing elements, devices, and
> > memory through HW description data (FDT, ACPI) or a bus-specific
> > mechani
On Tue, 3 Sep 2013, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 03, 2013 at 09:40:48AM +0100, Wei Liu wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 03, 2013 at 09:28:11AM +0800, Qin Chuanyu wrote:
> > > On 2013/9/2 15:57, Wei Liu wrote:
> > > >On Sat, Aug 31, 2013 at 12:45:11PM +0800, Qin Chuanyu wrote:
> > > >>On 2013/8/30
On Wed, 1 Aug 2012, Nikunj A Dadhania wrote:
> Hi Stefano,
>
> On Wed, 1 Aug 2012 12:23:37 +0100, Stefano Stabellini
> wrote:
> > On Tue, 5 Jun 2012, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > > On Tue, 5 Jun 2012, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > > On Tue, 2012-06-05
On Tue, 5 Jun 2012, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> On Tue, 5 Jun 2012, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Tue, 2012-06-05 at 18:34 +0530, Nikunj A Dadhania wrote:
> > > PeterZ, is 7/7 alright to be picked?
> >
> > Yeah, I guess it is.. I haven't had time to rework my t
On Tue, 5 Jun 2012, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, 2012-06-05 at 14:26 +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > On Tue, 5 Jun 2012, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2012-06-05 at 18:34 +0530, Nikunj A Dadhania wrote:
> > > > PeterZ, is 7/7 alright to be picked?
> &
On Tue, 5 Jun 2012, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, 2012-06-05 at 18:34 +0530, Nikunj A Dadhania wrote:
> > PeterZ, is 7/7 alright to be picked?
>
> Yeah, I guess it is.. I haven't had time to rework my tlb series yet
> though. But these two patches together should make it work for x86.
>
Good.
On Tue, 5 Jun 2012, Nikunj A Dadhania wrote:
> On Tue, 5 Jun 2012 12:58:32 +0100, Stefano Stabellini
> wrote:
> > On Tue, 5 Jun 2012, Nikunj A Dadhania wrote:
> > > On Tue, 5 Jun 2012 11:48:02 +0100, Stefano Stabellini
> > > wrote:
> > > >
&
On Tue, 5 Jun 2012, Nikunj A Dadhania wrote:
> On Tue, 5 Jun 2012 11:48:02 +0100, Stefano Stabellini
> wrote:
> >
> > I am also interested in introducing HAVE_RCU_TABLE_FREE on x86 for Xen.
> > Maybe we can pull our efforts together :-)
> >
> > Giving a look
behavior is the same
as today.
If CONFIG_XEN is enabled and we are running on native,
HAVE_RCU_TABLE_FREE is set but tlb_remove_table is never called: we
still call tlb_remove_page so there should be no performance penalty.
If CONFIG_XEN is enabled and we are running on Xen we make full usage of
t
oss-builds,
> * OpenBSD 5.1 amd64 (not for final version though, master doesn't build).
> Untested: Xen.
I tested it on Xen: it works correctly.
Tested-by: Stefano Stabellini
On Thu, 10 May 2012, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> Push msi_supported enabling to the APIC implementations where we can
> encapsulate the decision more cleanly, hiding the details from the
> generic code.
>
> CC: Stefano Stabellini
> Signed-off-by: Jan Kiszka
This patch is missing
On Tue, 1 May 2012, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> On 05/01/2012 03:59 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Tue, 2012-05-01 at 12:57 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >> Anyway, I don't have any idea about the costs involved with
> >> HAVE_RCU_TABLE_FREE, but I don't think its much.. otherwise these other
>
On Wed, 21 Mar 2012, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 21/03/2012 17:54, Stefano Stabellini ha scritto:
> >> >
> >> > No, you need to set UF in case the code observes it without actually
> >> > enabling interrupt delivery on the ISA bus.
> >
> > Well,
On Thu, 22 Mar 2012, Zhang, Yang Z wrote:
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Stefano Stabellini [mailto:stefano.stabell...@eu.citrix.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2012 2:04 AM
> >
> > On Mon, 19 Mar 2012, Zhang, Yang Z wrote:
> > > Use a tim
On Wed, 21 Mar 2012, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 20/03/2012 19:35, Stefano Stabellini ha scritto:
> > This is the function that is used to figure out whether we need the
> > timers or not, the condition seems to be:
> >
> > (Not (REG_C_UF | REG_C_AF)) And (Not (REG
On Wed, 21 Mar 2012, Zhang, Yang Z wrote:
> > > struct tm *tm = &s->current_tm;
> > > -int64_t host_usec, guest_sec, guest_usec;
> > > +int64_t host_usec, guest_sec, guest_usec, offset_usec,
> > > old_guest_usec;
> > >
> > > host_usec = qemu_get_clock_ns(host_clock) / NS_PER_USEC
> +/* handle update-ended timer */
> +static void check_update_timer(RTCState *s)
> +{
> +uint64_t next_update_time, expire_time;
> +uint64_t guest_usec;
> +qemu_del_timer(s->update_timer);
> +qemu_del_timer(s->update_timer2);
> +
> +if (!((s->cmos_data[RTC_REG_C] & (REG_C_UF |
On Mon, 19 Mar 2012, Zhang, Yang Z wrote:
> Use a timer to emulate update cycle. When update cycle ended and UIE is
> setting, then raise an interrupt. The timer runs only when UF or AF is
> cleared.
The idea is that if the user requests the update-ended interrupt (UIE)
we setup a timer to injec
On Mon, 19 Mar 2012, Zhang, Yang Z wrote:
> The first update cycle begins one - half seconds later when divider reset is
> removing.
>
> Signed-off-by: Yang Zhang
> ---
> hw/mc146818rtc.c | 38 +-
> 1 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> dif
On Mon, 19 Mar 2012, Zhang, Yang Z wrote:
> The UIP(update in progress) is set when RTC is updating. And the update cycle
> begins 244us later after UIP is set. And it is cleared when update end.
this patch seems good to me
> Signed-off-by: Yang Zhang
> ---
> hw/mc146818rtc.c | 18 +
On Mon, 19 Mar 2012, Zhang, Yang Z wrote:
> There has no need to use two periodic timer to update RTC time. In this
> patch, we only update it when guest reading it.
So the basic idea here is that we don't need to two periodic timers
because we are going to calculate the RTC guest time from QEMU'
On Mon, 19 Mar 2012, Zhang, Yang Z wrote:
> Change DM(date mode) and 24/12 control bit don't affect the internal
> registers. It only indicates what format is using for those registers. So we
> don't need to update time format when it is modified.
That might be true, but if the user changes form
On Thu, 1 Mar 2012, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 01, 2012 at 10:27:02AM +, Dave Martin wrote:
> > So, where there's a compelling reason to inline these things, we can use
> > the existing techniques if we're alert to the risks. But in cases where
> > there isn't a compelling r
On Wed, 29 Feb 2012, Dave Martin wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 09:56:02AM +, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > On Wed, 2012-02-29 at 09:34 +, Dave Martin wrote:
> > > On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 12:28:29PM +, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> >
> > > > I don&#
On Tue, 28 Feb 2012, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Tue, 2012-02-28 at 10:20 +, Dave Martin wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 07:33:39PM +, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2012-02-27 at 18:03 +, Dave Martin wrote:
> > > > > Since we support only ARMv7+ there are "T2" and "T3" encodings
>
On Tue, 28 Feb 2012, Dave Martin wrote:
> > Given that Stefano is proposing to make the ISS a (per-hypervisor)
> > constant we could consider just defining the Thumb and non-Thumb
> > constants instead of doing all the construction with the __HVC_IMM stuff
> > -- that would remove a big bit of the
hypervisor specific tag.
Signed-off-by: Stefano Stabellini
CC: kvm@vger.kernel.org
---
arch/arm/include/asm/xen/hypercall.h | 87 +++---
1 files changed, 48 insertions(+), 39 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm/include/asm/xen/hypercall.h
b/arch/arm/inclu
_with_Virtualization_Extensions.
The list of patches with diffstat follows:
Stefano Stabellini (13):
xen/arm: use r12 to pass the hypercall number to the hypervisor
xen/arm: introduce privcmp, physdev_op and memory_op hypercalls.
xen/arm: mmu.h and page.h related definitions
On Mon, 19 Dec 2011, Avi Kivity wrote:
> -static int xen_log_start(CPUPhysMemoryClient *client, target_phys_addr_t
> phys_addr, ram_addr_t size)
> +static void xen_log_start(MemoryListener *listener,
> + MemoryRegionSection *section)
> {
> -XenIOState *state = contain
On Thu, 1 Dec 2011, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-11-30 at 18:32 +0000, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > On Wed, 30 Nov 2011, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > > KVM and Xen at least both fall into the single-return-value category,
> > > so we should be able to agree on a ca
On Wed, 30 Nov 2011, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > In principal we could also offer the user options as to which particular
> > platform a guest looks like.
>
> At least when using a qemu based simulation. Most platforms have some
> characteristics that are not meaningful in a classic virtualization
>
On Wed, 30 Nov 2011, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> On 30 November 2011 11:39, Stefano Stabellini
> wrote:
> > A git branch is available here (not ready for submission):
> >
> > git://xenbits.xen.org/people/sstabellini/linux-pvhvm.git arm
> >
> > the branch above i
On Wed, 30 Nov 2011, Anup Patel wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I wanted to know how Xen-ARM for A15 will address following concerns:
>
> - How will Xen-ARM for A15 support legacy guest environment like ARMv5 or
> ARMv6 ?
It is not our focus at the moment; we are targeting operating systems
that support a
On Tue, 29 Nov 2011, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Tuesday 29 November 2011, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > a few weeks ago I (and a few others) started hacking on a
> > proof-of-concept hypervisor port to Cortex-A15 which uses and requires
> > ARMv7 virtualizatio
Hi all,
a few weeks ago I (and a few others) started hacking on a
proof-of-concept hypervisor port to Cortex-A15 which uses and requires
ARMv7 virtualization extensions. The intention of this work was to find
out how to best support ARM v7+ on Xen. See
http://old-list-archives.xen.org/archives/html
CC'ing Keir.
On Fri, 2 Sep 2011, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> On 09/02/2011 01:47 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Fri, 2011-09-02 at 12:29 -0700, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> >>> I know that its generally considered bad form, but there's at least one
> >>> spinlock that's only taken from NMI cont
On Fri, 2 Sep 2011, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge
>
> This series replaces the existing paravirtualized spinlock mechanism
> with a paravirtualized ticketlock mechanism.
>
> Ticket locks have an inherent problem in a virtualized case, because
> the vCPUs are scheduled ra
On Thu, 13 May 2010, Michael Tokarev wrote:
> Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> []
> > diff --git a/hw/cirrus_vga.c b/hw/cirrus_vga.c
> > index 9f61a01..81c443b 100644
> > --- a/hw/cirrus_vga.c
> > +++ b/hw/cirrus_vga.c
>
> The same as with previous patch: Yellow scr
On Thu, 13 May 2010, Avi Kivity wrote:
> > /* extra x, y */
> > -sx = (src % ABS(s->cirrus_blt_srcpitch)) / depth;
> > -sy = (src / ABS(s->cirrus_blt_srcpitch));
> > +sx = (src % line_offset) / depth;
> > +sy = (src / line_offset);
> >
>
> Does anything prevent the guest
On Wed, 12 May 2010, Jamie Lokier wrote:
> Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > On Wed, 12 May 2010, Avi Kivity wrote:
> > > It's useful if you have a one-line horizontal pattern you want to
> > > propagate all over.
> >
> > It might be useful all
On Wed, 12 May 2010, Avi Kivity wrote:
> > I guess even a src blt pitch of 0 could be useful there, however in
> > practice I think the only rop function that was written with this case in
> > mind has:
> >
> > dstpitch -= bltwidth;
> > srcpitch -= bltwidth;
> >
> > if (dstpitch< 0 || srcpitch< 0
On Wed, 12 May 2010, Avi Kivity wrote:
> > I suggest to start using the display pitch (with the proper sign)
> > instead of cirrus_blt_srcpitch in cirrus_do_copy at least when
> > cirrus_blt_srcpitch doesn't have a proper value.
> >
>
> Why switch from one bug to the other?
>
> It's perfectly
On Wed, 12 May 2010, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 05/12/2010 03:20 PM, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > On Mon, 10 May 2010, Avi Kivity wrote:
> >
> >> On 05/10/2010 10:41 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
> >>
> >>> On 05/06/2010 11:07 PM, Michael Tokarev wrote:
On Mon, 10 May 2010, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 05/10/2010 10:41 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
> > On 05/06/2010 11:07 PM, Michael Tokarev wrote:
> >> There was a bug recently fixed in vnc code. Apparently
> >> there's something similar in the cirrus emulation as well.
> >> Here it triggers _always_ (includin
Avi Kivity wrote:
> (I'd be quite happy constructing the entire machine config on the
> command line, but I realize it's just me)
>
It is not just you.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at
David S. Ahern wrote:
>
> Stefano Stabellini wrote:
>> Michael Tokarev wrote:
>>
>>> Other than that, an.. excellent idea, I wanted to propose
>>> just that when I first saw all this stuff, but was somewhat
>>> afraid. And I *think* there's at l
Michael Tokarev wrote:
> Other than that, an.. excellent idea, I wanted to propose
> just that when I first saw all this stuff, but was somewhat
> afraid. And I *think* there's at least *some* sense. Qemu
> is a CPU emulator and may work on another arch where those
> bits are defined differently
Michael Tokarev wrote:
> David S. Ahern wrote:
>> Michael Tokarev wrote:
>>> David S. Ahern wrote:
case CHR_IOCTL_SERIAL_SET_TIOCM:
{
int sarg = *(int *)arg;
int targ = 0;
+ioctl(s->fd_in, TIOCMGET, &targ);
>>> here, one
58 matches
Mail list logo
