On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 10:31 PM, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 12/29/2011 04:03 PM, Liu ping fan wrote:
>> > Why do we want an independent grace period, is hotunplugging a vcpu that
>> > much different from hotunplugging memory?
>> >
>> I thought that if less readers on the same srcu lock, then
>> synch
The prefix register is a read-mostly value that is necessary to emulate
memory accesses on behalf of the guest cpu in an architecture compliant
way. Avoid an additional ioctl by providing the prefix content in the
r/o section of kvm_run.
Signed-off-by: Christian Borntraeger
---
arch/s390/include
On some cpus the overhead for virtualization instructions is in the same
range as a system call. Having to call multiple ioctls to get set registers
will make certain userspace handled exits more expensive than necessary.
Lets provide two sections in kvm_run to have a shared save area for
guest reg
This patch adds the general purpose registers to the kvm_run structure.
Signed-off-by: Christian Borntraeger
---
arch/s390/include/asm/kvm.h |2 ++
arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h |3 +--
arch/s390/kvm/diag.c |6 +++---
arch/s390/kvm/intercept.c|4 ++--
This patch adds the access registers to the kvm_run structure.
Signed-off-by: Christian Borntraeger
---
arch/s390/include/asm/kvm.h |2 ++
arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h |1 -
arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c | 15 ---
3 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-
Avi, Marcelo,
here is the latest update of my patch set about guest registers in kvm_run.
I have added an u64 flag field to make the whole structure extensible
(and shrinkable).
For s390 I added the prefix register as read-only and access and general
purpose as read write.
--
To unsubscribe from
If the guest hypervisor node contains "has-idle" property.
Signed-off-by: Liu Yu
---
v2:
1. move the idle code into assembly.
2. move the part that check "has-idle" into epapr code.
arch/powerpc/include/asm/epapr_hcalls.h |1 +
arch/powerpc/include/asm/machdep.h |5 +
arch/powe
from the kvm guest paravirt init code.
Signed-off-by: Liu Yu
---
arch/powerpc/include/asm/epapr_hcalls.h |8 +
arch/powerpc/kernel/Makefile|1 +
arch/powerpc/kernel/epapr_para.c| 45 +++
arch/powerpc/kernel/kvm.c |9
And add a new flag definition in kvm_ppc_pvinfo to indicate
whether host support EV_IDLE hcall.
Signed-off-by: Liu Yu
---
v2:
1. instead of adding new field in kvm_ppc_pvinfo, use flags.
2. expose hcall definitions to userspace
arch/powerpc/include/asm/kvm_para.h | 14 --
arch/pow
On Tue, Jan 03, 2012 at 11:38:13PM -0500, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
> From: Boris Ostrovsky
>
> In some cases guests should not provide workarounds for errata even when the
> physical processor is affected. For example, because of erratum 400 on family
> 10h processors a Linux guest will read an MSR
On Wed, Jan 04, 2012 at 03:06:43PM +0900, Takuya Yoshikawa wrote:
> It is possible that the __set_bit() in mark_page_dirty() is called
> simultaneously on the same region of memory, which may result in only
> one bit being set, because some callers do not take mmu_lock before
> mark_page_dirty().
>
On Wed, Jan 04, 2012 at 10:25:19AM +0100, Carsten Otte wrote:
> Hi Avi,
>
> after some more discussion about how to do storage keys proper, I could
> not come up with a sane and safe way of doing SSKE without either
> over or underindicating the change bit in corner cases (leads to
> corrupted gue
On Thu, Jan 05, 2012 at 11:41:30AM -0200, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 04, 2012 at 10:25:19AM +0100, Carsten Otte wrote:
> > Hi Avi,
> >
> > after some more discussion about how to do storage keys proper, I could
> > not come up with a sane and safe way of doing SSKE without either
> > ove
On Thu, 5 Jan 2012 09:48:37 -0200
Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 04, 2012 at 03:06:43PM +0900, Takuya Yoshikawa wrote:
> > It is possible that the __set_bit() in mark_page_dirty() is called
> > simultaneously on the same region of memory, which may result in only
> > one bit being set, beca
I am using k3.2.0-rc1 where the kvm steal time handling is included
The .config file has :CONFIG_PARAVIRT_GUEST=y,CONFIG_PARAVIRT_TIME_ACCOUNTING=y.
I have a host and 2 guests with that kernel and devised a scenario where
one guest should have %st> 0 (Linux top utility) .
Still I am always getting
On 05.01.2012 14:47, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
Where is the userspace part?
The ucontrol patchset is intended to be used with a machine
simulator called cecsim. It can emulate an entire mainframe
including nested virtualisation and is used for development
and test of N+1 generation firmware on N ge
I am using k3.2.0-rc1 where the kvm steal time handling is included .
The .config file has :CONFIG_PARAVIRT_GUEST=y,CONFIG_PARAVIRT_TIME_ACCOUNTING=y.
I have a host and 2 guests with that kernel and devised a scenario where
one guest should have %st> 0 (Linux top utility) .
Still I am always gettin
On 01/04/2012 08:36 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>
> On 04.01.2012, at 21:12, Scott Wood wrote:
>
>> On 01/03/2012 07:10 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>>> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/kvm.h b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/kvm.h
>>> index 25964ee..fb3fddc 100644
>>> --- a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/kvm
On 01/05/12 06:20, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
On Tue, Jan 03, 2012 at 11:38:13PM -0500, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/svm.c b/arch/x86/kvm/svm.c
index e32243e..b19769d 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kvm/svm.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kvm/svm.c
@@ -110,6 +110,13 @@ struct nested_state {
#define MS
On 01/03/2012 07:44 PM, Alex Williamson wrote:
Yep, that's what I would have guessed, there's a 256MB resource. I'm
not sure if the seabios you're using is mapping the MMIO hole
efficiently enough to handle that. Can you test on new upstream
qemu-kvm? Thanks,
I'm not done poking the system,
> This requires some logic change and then rewording:
>
> - enable TSC deadline timer support by default if in-kernel irqchip is
> used
> - disable it on user request via a cpu feature flag
Yes, the logic has been implemented by the former patch as:
+if (env->tsc_deadline_timer_enabled) {
On 2012-01-05 18:07, Liu, Jinsong wrote:
>> Sorry, it remains bogus to expose the tsc deadline timer feature on
>> machines < pc-1.1. That's just like we introduced kvmclock only to
>> pc-0.14 onward. The reason is that guest OSes so far running on
>> qemu-1.0 or older without deadline timer suppor
On 01/04/2012 10:07 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
> Ok here's another idea on how to handle this. What if we encode the
> register size in the constant? That way, if the register grows later,
> we can still be backwards compatible, but give user space exactly the
> size it asks for.
>
> We could then
On 01/03/2012 10:08 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 01/03/2012 06:28 PM, Konstantin Ryabitsev wrote:
>> On Tue, 2012-01-03 at 12:10 +0200, Avi Kivity wrote:
>>> I'm surprised bugzilla.kernel.org isn't responding. Copying
>>> ftpad...@kernel.org for ETA (though that address isn't responding, either).
>>
On 05.01.2012, at 18:16, Scott Wood wrote:
> On 01/04/2012 08:36 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>>
>> On 04.01.2012, at 21:12, Scott Wood wrote:
>>
>>> On 01/03/2012 07:10 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/kvm.h
b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/kvm.h
index 259
From: Hongyong Zang
If a guest's ram_size exceeds KVM_32BIT_GAP_START, the corresponding kvm tool's
virtual address size should be (ram_size + KVM_32BIT_GAP_SIZE), rather than
ram_size.
Use macro define KVM_32BIT_MAX_MEM_SIZE instead of magic number
"0x1ULL".
Signed-off-by: Hongyong Za
> -Original Message-
> From: John 'Warthog9' Hawley [mailto:warth...@kernel.org]
> Sent: Friday, January 06, 2012 10:34 AM
> To: Avi Kivity
> Cc: Konstantin Ryabitsev; Ren, Yongjie; kvm@vger.kernel.org; ftpadmin
> Subject: Re: where should I report kvm kernel bug?
>
> On 01/03/2012 10:08 A
This is a revised version of the ONE_REG interface. The main difference to v1
is that we now encode the register size in the constant, making it very
unambiguous what size it is. That way we can just take a pointer from user space
to write it to.
Thanks a lot to Scott for reviewing the previous pa
Until now, we always set HIOR based on the PVR, but this is just wrong.
Instead, we should be setting HIOR explicitly, so user space can decide
what the initial HIOR value is - just like on real hardware.
We keep the old PVR based way around for backwards compatibility, but
once user space uses th
From: Paul Mackerras
This moves the get/set_one_reg implementation down from powerpc.c into
booke.c, book3s_pr.c and book3s_hv.c. This avoids #ifdefs in C code,
but more importantly, it fixes a bug on Book3s HV where we were
accessing beyond the end of the kvm_vcpu struct (via the to_book3s()
ma
Right now we transfer a static struct every time we want to get or set
registers. Unfortunately, over time we realize that there are more of
these than we thought of before and the extensibility and flexibility of
transferring a full struct every time is limited.
So this is a new approach to the p
On 06.01.2012, at 04:59, Alexander Graf wrote:
> Right now we transfer a static struct every time we want to get or set
> registers. Unfortunately, over time we realize that there are more of
> these than we thought of before and the extensibility and flexibility of
> transferring a full struct e
Right now we transfer a static struct every time we want to get or set
registers. Unfortunately, over time we realize that there are more of
these than we thought of before and the extensibility and flexibility of
transferring a full struct every time is limited.
So this is a new approach to the p
Hi,
Nested kvm is supported. Wondering if a PCI device is able to be
passed through into the nested kvm. Could some experts share some
insides?
Thx,
Tian Fang
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo inf
Hey Alex,
On 24/12/11 00:39, Alexander Graf wrote:
>
> On 23.12.2011, at 14:26, Matt Evans wrote:
>
>>
>> On 23/12/2011, at 11:58 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On 13.12.2011, at 07:21, Matt Evans wrote:
>>>
Different architectures will deal with MMIO exits differently. For
exa
On 01/05/2012 11:07 AM, Gordon Messmer wrote:
I started with an update to seabios, from the bundled version
0.6.1.2-8.el6 to a rebuilt package from F16, 0.6.2-3.el6. That's enough
to get the guest to boot with the pass-through video card. It doesn't
work, currently, and I'm pretty sure that's bec
use int64 when compare two time
int32 only represent only 136 years when comparing two times based on second.
It would be better to use int64.
Signed-off-by: Yang Zhang
diff --git a/qemu-common.h b/qemu-common.h
index b2de015..c14f506 100644
--- a/qemu-common.h
+++ b/qemu-common.h
@@ -116,8 +1
Recently, I did some work for power optimization w/ KVM and I found
there was a periodic timer from qemu which stop the platform from staying deep
C state for a long period. After looking into the qemu code, there was a
periodic RTC update timer which is the culprit. In current RTC emula
use gettimeofday() instead of time().
Please refer the patch zero for the description.
Signed-off-by: Yang Zhang
diff --git a/vl.c b/vl.c
index 01c5a9d..9a51047 100644
--- a/vl.c
+++ b/vl.c
@@ -438,8 +438,11 @@ void qemu_get_timedate(struct tm *tm, int64_t offset)
{
time_t ti;
struct
change the RTC update logic to use host time with offset to calculate RTC clock.
There have no need to use two periodic timers to maintain an internal
timer for RTC clock update and alarm check. Instead, we calculate the real RTC
time by the host time with an offset. For alarm and updated
On Fri, 2012-01-06 at 07:37 +, Zhang, Yang Z wrote:
> Please refer the patch zero for the description.
Each patch should have description about what it does in the changelog,
otherwise you're going to lose important information about the change.
Furthermore, cover letters don't get merged at
41 matches
Mail list logo
