On 10.07.2013, at 20:24, Scott Wood wrote:
> On 07/10/2013 05:23:36 AM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>> On 10.07.2013, at 00:26, Scott Wood wrote:
>> > On 07/09/2013 05:00:26 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>> >> It'll also be more flexible at the same time. You could take the logs and
>> >> actually check w
On 07/10/2013 05:23:36 AM, Alexander Graf wrote:
On 10.07.2013, at 00:26, Scott Wood wrote:
> On 07/09/2013 05:00:26 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>> It'll also be more flexible at the same time. You could take the
logs and actually check what's going on to debug issues that you're
encountering
On 10.07.2013, at 00:26, Scott Wood wrote:
> On 07/09/2013 05:00:26 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>> On 09.07.2013, at 23:54, Scott Wood wrote:
>> > On 07/09/2013 04:49:32 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>> >> Not sure I understand. What the timing stats do is that they measure the
>> >> time between [exi
On Tue, 2013-07-09 at 17:26 -0500, Scott Wood wrote:
> On 07/09/2013 05:00:26 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
> >
> > On 09.07.2013, at 23:54, Scott Wood wrote:
> >
> > > On 07/09/2013 04:49:32 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
> > >> Not sure I understand. What the timing stats do is that they
> > measure t
On Wed, 2013-07-10 at 00:00 +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
> Then don't overflow the buffer. Make it large enough. IIRC ftrace improved
> recently to dynamically increase the buffer size too.
>
> Steven, do I remember correctly here?
Not really. Ftrace only dynamically increases the buffer when t
On 07/09/2013 05:00:26 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
On 09.07.2013, at 23:54, Scott Wood wrote:
> On 07/09/2013 04:49:32 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>> Not sure I understand. What the timing stats do is that they
measure the time between [exit ... entry], right? We'd do the same
thing, just all i
On 09.07.2013, at 23:54, Scott Wood wrote:
> On 07/09/2013 04:49:32 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>> On 09.07.2013, at 20:29, Scott Wood wrote:
>> > On 07/09/2013 12:46:32 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>> >> On 07/09/2013 07:16 PM, Scott Wood wrote:
>> >>> On 07/08/2013 01:45:58 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
On 07/09/2013 04:49:32 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
On 09.07.2013, at 20:29, Scott Wood wrote:
> On 07/09/2013 12:46:32 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>> On 07/09/2013 07:16 PM, Scott Wood wrote:
>>> On 07/08/2013 01:45:58 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
On 03.07.2013, at 15:30, Mihai Caraman wrote:
>>>
On 09.07.2013, at 20:29, Scott Wood wrote:
> On 07/09/2013 12:46:32 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>> On 07/09/2013 07:16 PM, Scott Wood wrote:
>>> On 07/08/2013 01:45:58 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
On 03.07.2013, at 15:30, Mihai Caraman wrote:
> Some guests are making use of return from machi
On 07/09/2013 12:46:32 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
On 07/09/2013 07:16 PM, Scott Wood wrote:
On 07/08/2013 01:45:58 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
On 03.07.2013, at 15:30, Mihai Caraman wrote:
> Some guests are making use of return from machine check
instruction
> to do crazy things even though th
On 07/09/2013 07:16 PM, Scott Wood wrote:
On 07/08/2013 01:45:58 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
On 03.07.2013, at 15:30, Mihai Caraman wrote:
> Some guests are making use of return from machine check instruction
> to do crazy things even though the 64-bit kernel doesn't handle yet
> this interrupt.
On 07/08/2013 01:45:58 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
On 03.07.2013, at 15:30, Mihai Caraman wrote:
> Some guests are making use of return from machine check instruction
> to do crazy things even though the 64-bit kernel doesn't handle yet
> this interrupt. Emulate MCSRR0/1 SPR and rfmci instruction
On 03.07.2013, at 15:30, Mihai Caraman wrote:
> Some guests are making use of return from machine check instruction
> to do crazy things even though the 64-bit kernel doesn't handle yet
> this interrupt. Emulate MCSRR0/1 SPR and rfmci instruction accordingly.
>
> Signed-off-by: Mihai Caraman
>
Some guests are making use of return from machine check instruction
to do crazy things even though the 64-bit kernel doesn't handle yet
this interrupt. Emulate MCSRR0/1 SPR and rfmci instruction accordingly.
Signed-off-by: Mihai Caraman
---
arch/powerpc/include/asm/kvm_host.h |1 +
arch/powe
14 matches
Mail list logo