On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 04:13:02PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 09/06/2013 14:27, Gleb Natapov ha scritto:
> > On Sun, Jun 09, 2013 at 08:17:19PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> >> On 06/09/2013 07:56 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> >>> On Sun, Jun 09, 2013 at 07:44:03PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
>
Il 09/06/2013 14:27, Gleb Natapov ha scritto:
> On Sun, Jun 09, 2013 at 08:17:19PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
>> On 06/09/2013 07:56 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
>>> On Sun, Jun 09, 2013 at 07:44:03PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
On 06/09/2013 07:36 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 09, 2
On 06/09/2013 08:27 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 09, 2013 at 08:17:19PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
>> On 06/09/2013 07:56 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
>>> On Sun, Jun 09, 2013 at 07:44:03PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
On 06/09/2013 07:36 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 09, 201
On Sun, Jun 09, 2013 at 08:17:19PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> On 06/09/2013 07:56 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > On Sun, Jun 09, 2013 at 07:44:03PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> >> On 06/09/2013 07:36 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> >>> On Sun, Jun 09, 2013 at 07:25:17PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
>
On 06/09/2013 07:56 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 09, 2013 at 07:44:03PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
>> On 06/09/2013 07:36 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
>>> On Sun, Jun 09, 2013 at 07:25:17PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
On 06/09/2013 06:19 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 09, 201
On Sun, Jun 09, 2013 at 07:44:03PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> On 06/09/2013 07:36 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > On Sun, Jun 09, 2013 at 07:25:17PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> >> On 06/09/2013 06:19 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> >>> On Sun, Jun 09, 2013 at 06:01:45PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
>
On 06/09/2013 07:36 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 09, 2013 at 07:25:17PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
>> On 06/09/2013 06:19 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
>>> On Sun, Jun 09, 2013 at 06:01:45PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
On 06/09/2013 05:39 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 09, 201
On Sun, Jun 09, 2013 at 07:25:17PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> On 06/09/2013 06:19 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > On Sun, Jun 09, 2013 at 06:01:45PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> >> On 06/09/2013 05:39 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> >>> On Sun, Jun 09, 2013 at 05:29:37PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
>
On 06/09/2013 06:19 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 09, 2013 at 06:01:45PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
>> On 06/09/2013 05:39 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
>>> On Sun, Jun 09, 2013 at 05:29:37PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
On 06/09/2013 04:45 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> +static int em
On Sun, Jun 09, 2013 at 06:01:45PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> On 06/09/2013 05:39 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > On Sun, Jun 09, 2013 at 05:29:37PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> >> On 06/09/2013 04:45 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> >>
> >>> +static int emulator_fix_hypercall(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *c
On 06/09/2013 05:39 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 09, 2013 at 05:29:37PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
>> On 06/09/2013 04:45 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
>>
>>> +static int emulator_fix_hypercall(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt)
>>> +{
>>> + struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu = emul_to_vcpu(ctxt);
>>> + re
On Sun, Jun 09, 2013 at 05:29:37PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> On 06/09/2013 04:45 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
>
> > +static int emulator_fix_hypercall(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt)
> > +{
> > + struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu = emul_to_vcpu(ctxt);
> > + return kvm_exec_with_stopped_vcpu(vcpu->kvm,
> >
On 06/09/2013 04:45 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> +static int emulator_fix_hypercall(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt)
> +{
> + struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu = emul_to_vcpu(ctxt);
> + return kvm_exec_with_stopped_vcpu(vcpu->kvm,
> + emulator_fix_hypercall_cb, ctxt);
> +}
> +
> +
> /*
On 06/09/2013 04:59 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 09, 2013 at 04:56:42PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
>> On 06/09/2013 04:45 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
>>> On Sat, Jun 08, 2013 at 11:15:37AM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
From: Xiao Guangrong
Currently, memory synchronization is
On Sun, Jun 09, 2013 at 04:56:42PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> On 06/09/2013 04:45 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > On Sat, Jun 08, 2013 at 11:15:37AM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> >> From: Xiao Guangrong
> >>
> >> Currently, memory synchronization is missed in emulator_fix_hypercall,
> >> please s
On 06/09/2013 04:45 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 08, 2013 at 11:15:37AM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
>> From: Xiao Guangrong
>>
>> Currently, memory synchronization is missed in emulator_fix_hypercall,
>> please see the commit 758ccc89b83
>> (KVM: x86: drop calling kvm_mmu_zap_all in emul
On Sat, Jun 08, 2013 at 11:15:37AM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> From: Xiao Guangrong
>
> Currently, memory synchronization is missed in emulator_fix_hypercall,
> please see the commit 758ccc89b83
> (KVM: x86: drop calling kvm_mmu_zap_all in emulator_fix_hypercall)
>
> This patch fixes it by in
From: Xiao Guangrong
Currently, memory synchronization is missed in emulator_fix_hypercall,
please see the commit 758ccc89b83
(KVM: x86: drop calling kvm_mmu_zap_all in emulator_fix_hypercall)
This patch fixes it by introducing kvm_vcpus_hang_on_page_start() and
kvm_vcpus_hang_on_page_end which
18 matches
Mail list logo