> -Original Message-
> From: kvm-ow...@vger.kernel.org [mailto:kvm-ow...@vger.kernel.org] On
> Behalf Of Peter Wu
> Sent: Sunday, March 23, 2014 6:00 AM
> To: Gleb Natapov
> Cc: Venkatesh Srinivas; Peter Zijlstra; Ingo Molnar; Andi Kleen; Linux Kernel
> Developers List; H. Peter Anvin; kv
On 25/03/14 13:37, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 25/03/2014 04:19, Gonglei (Arei) ha scritto:
>> Based on discussions in:
>> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2013-11/threads.html#03322
>>
>> About KVM_SET_GSI_ROUTING ioctl, I tested changing RCU to SRCU, but
>> unfortunately
>> it looks li
Hi all,
I want to implement a virtual pci device in qemu and when needed
inject a virtual interrupt into the running guest. However, possibly
this action would fail and crash the guest VM especially when the
workload in guest is heavy. Qemu report the following errors:
>KVM: entry failed, hardwar
> > Based on discussions in:
> > http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2013-11/threads.html#03322
> >
> > About KVM_SET_GSI_ROUTING ioctl, I tested changing RCU to SRCU, but
> unfortunately
> > it looks like SRCU's grace period is no better than RCU.
>
> Really? This is not what Christian
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=72381
--- Comment #2 from robert...@intel.com ---
Tried this case: L0 94b3ffcd + L1 94b3ffcd , L1 panic.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching the assignee of the bug.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm"
> On my system I have HZ=100 and lots of CPUs. So RCUs "every cpu has
> scheduled"
> is certainly slower than SRCUs algorithm
> (/*
> * We use an adaptive strategy for synchronize_srcu() and especially for
> * synchronize_srcu_expedited(). We spin for a fixed time period
> * (defined below) to
Il 26/03/2014 04:51, Paul Mackerras ha scritto:
> I would like to know from ARM and PPC maintainers *now* (before the
> merge window opens) what will be in 3.15. Also, PPC guys, please
> make sure the pull requests will be based on commit e724f080f5dd
> (KVM: PPC: Book3S HV: Fix register usage w
Il 25/03/2014 21:35, Christian Borntraeger ha scritto:
On 25/03/14 18:29, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
Also, the pull requests I got in the last couple of months were a bit
messy, and I'm already fearing that Linus notices. In the future, I'll
tag kvm-3.x-base (e.g. kvm-3.16-base) when I open kvm/next,
Il 26/03/2014 09:22, Gonglei (Arei) ha scritto:
Yes, previously I was using synchronize_srcu, which is not good. When I
changed it to synchronize_srcu_expedited, grace period delay is much better
than synchronize_srcu. Though in our tests, we can still see some impact
of KVM_SET_GSI_ROUTING ioctl
Il 26/03/2014 08:23, Wu, Feng ha scritto:
Is there a solution for this issue right now? I also met this GPF crash.
Can you attach your .config?
Paolo
--
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
On Wed, 26 Mar 2014 10:19:52 +0100
Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 26/03/2014 04:51, Paul Mackerras ha scritto:
> >> > I would like to know from ARM and PPC maintainers *now* (before the
> >> > merge window opens) what will be in 3.15. Also, PPC guys, please
> >> > make sure the pull requests will be b
On 26/03/14 09:22, Gonglei (Arei) wrote:
> Without patches, ping time can jump from 0.3ms to 2ms-30ms. With
> synchronize_srcu
> patch, ping time is worse. With synchronize_srcu_expedited patch, ping time
> is
> overall good, though sometimes ping time jump to 1ms-3ms.
Just to understand what
On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 08:22:29AM +, Gonglei (Arei) wrote:
> > > Based on discussions in:
> > > http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2013-11/threads.html#03322
> > >
> > > About KVM_SET_GSI_ROUTING ioctl, I tested changing RCU to SRCU, but
> > unfortunately
> > > it looks like SRCU's g
On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 10:19:52AM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 26/03/2014 04:51, Paul Mackerras ha scritto:
> >>> I would like to know from ARM and PPC maintainers *now* (before the
> >>> merge window opens) what will be in 3.15. Also, PPC guys, please
> >>> make sure the pull requests will b
kvm_x86_ops is still NULL at this point. Since kvm_init_msr_list
cannot fail, it is safe to initialize it before the call.
Reported-by: Fengguang Wu
Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini
---
arch/x86/kvm/x86.c | 3 ++-
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a
From: Zoltan Kiss
Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2014 10:31:34 +
> skb_zerocopy can copy elements of the frags array between skbs, but it doesn't
> orphan them. Also, it doesn't handle errors, so this patch takes care of that
> as well, and modify the callers accordingly. skb_tx_error() is also added to
>
From: David Miller
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2014 15:59:58 -0400 (EDT)
> From: Zoltan Kiss
> Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2014 10:31:34 +
>
>> skb_zerocopy can copy elements of the frags array between skbs, but it
>> doesn't
>> orphan them. Also, it doesn't handle errors, so this patch takes care of that
>>
Jan Kiszka writes:
> On 2014-03-22 17:43, Bandan Das wrote:
>> Jan Kiszka writes:
>>
>>> On 2014-03-20 21:58, Bandan Das wrote:
Jan Kiszka writes:
> On 2014-03-20 04:28, Bandan Das wrote:
>> Some L1 hypervisors such as Xen seem to be calling invept after
>> vmclear or bef
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 18:30 +0200, Mihai Caraman wrote:
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_paired_singles.c
> b/arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_paired_singles.c
> index a59a25a..80c533e 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_paired_singles.c
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_paired_singles.c
> @@ -640,1
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 18:30 +0200, Mihai Caraman wrote:
> Load external pid (lwepx) instruction faults (when called from
> KVM with guest context) needs to be handled by KVM. This implies
> additional code in DO_KVM macro to identify the source of the
> exception (which oiginate from KVM host rathe
skb_zerocopy can copy elements of the frags array between skbs, but it doesn't
orphan them. Also, it doesn't handle errors, so this patch takes care of that
as well, and modify the callers accordingly. skb_tx_error() is also added to
the callers so they will signal the failed delivery towards the c
On 26/03/14 20:12, David Miller wrote:
From: David Miller
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2014 15:59:58 -0400 (EDT)
From: Zoltan Kiss
Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2014 10:31:34 +
skb_zerocopy can copy elements of the frags array between skbs, but it doesn't
orphan them. Also, it doesn't handle errors, so this p
Hi List!
Hope some one can help me, we had a big issue in our cloud the other
day, a couple of our openstack regions ( +2000 kvm guests with qcow2 )
went read only filesystem from the guest side because the backing
files directory (the openstack _base directory) was compromised and
the data was los
This patch adds SMAP handling logic when setting CR4 for guests
Signed-off-by: Feng Wu
---
arch/x86/kvm/cpuid.h | 8
arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c | 22 +++---
arch/x86/kvm/mmu.h | 2 ++
arch/x86/kvm/x86.c | 6 ++
4 files changed, 35 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff
This patch removes SMAP bit from CR4_RESERVED_BITS.
Signed-off-by: Feng Wu
---
arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h
index ae5d783..b673925 100644
--- a/arch/x86/includ
SMAP is disabled if CPU is in non-paging mode in hardware.
However KVM always uses paging mode to emulate guest non-paging
mode with TDP. To emulate this behavior, SMAP needs to be
manually disabled when guest switches to non-paging mode.
Signed-off-by: Feng Wu
---
arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c | 10 ++
Supervisor Mode Access Prevention (SMAP) is a new security feature
disclosed by Intel, please refer to the following document:
http://software.intel.com/sites/default/files/319433-014.pdf
Every access to a linear address is either a supervisor-mode access
or a user-mode access. All accesses pe
This patch exposes SMAP feature to guest
Signed-off-by: Feng Wu
---
arch/x86/kvm/cpuid.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/cpuid.c b/arch/x86/kvm/cpuid.c
index c697625..deb5f9b 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kvm/cpuid.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kvm/cpuid.c
@@ -303,7 +
On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 11:08:03PM -0300, Alejandro Comisario wrote:
> Hi List!
> Hope some one can help me, we had a big issue in our cloud the other
> day, a couple of our openstack regions ( +2000 kvm guests with qcow2 )
> went read only filesystem from the guest side because the backing
> files
29 matches
Mail list logo
