Should be fixed already in today's next.
Hey Mike,
Can you help me test the attached file?
Please use this new patch instead of the one in memblock tree.
November 8, 2022 3:55 PM, "Mike Rapoport" wrote:
> Hi Yajun,
>
> On Tue, Nov 08, 2022 at 02:27:53AM +, Yajun Deng wrote:
>
>> Hi Sachin,
>> I didn't have a powerpc architectur
> On 09-Nov-2022, at 2:27 AM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
>
> Em Wed, Nov 02, 2022 at 02:07:06PM +0530, Athira Rajeev escreveu:
>>
>>
>>> On 18-Oct-2022, at 2:26 PM, Athira Rajeev
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> In perf stat with CSV output option, number of fields
>>> in metrics output is not mat
November 9, 2022 6:03 PM, "Yajun Deng" wrote:
> Hey Mike,
>
Sorry, this email should be sent to Sachin but not Mike.
Please forgive my confusion. So:
Hey Sachin,
Can you help me test the attached file?
Please use this new patch instead of the one in memblock tree.
> Can you help me test the
> On 09-Nov-2022, at 3:55 PM, Yajun Deng wrote:
>
> November 9, 2022 6:03 PM, "Yajun Deng" wrote:
>
>> Hey Mike,
>>
> Sorry, this email should be sent to Sachin but not Mike.
> Please forgive my confusion. So:
>
> Hey Sachin,
> Can you help me test the attached file?
> Please use this ne
> On 09-Nov-2022, at 3:25 PM, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
>
> Should be fixed already in today's next.
Yup, thanks. next-20221109 boots successfully.
- Sachin
November 9, 2022 6:55 PM, "Sachin Sant" wrote:
>> On 09-Nov-2022, at 3:55 PM, Yajun Deng wrote:
>>
>> November 9, 2022 6:03 PM, "Yajun Deng" wrote:
>>
>>> Hey Mike,
>>
>> Sorry, this email should be sent to Sachin but not Mike.
>> Please forgive my confusion. So:
>>
>> Hey Sachin,
>> Can yo
Hi Yajun,
On Wed, Nov 09, 2022 at 11:32:27AM +, Yajun Deng wrote:
> November 9, 2022 6:55 PM, "Sachin Sant" wrote:
>
> >> On 09-Nov-2022, at 3:55 PM, Yajun Deng wrote:
> >>
> >> November 9, 2022 6:03 PM, "Yajun Deng" wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hey Mike,
> >>
> >> Sorry, this email should be sent
November 9, 2022 7:42 PM, "Mike Rapoport" wrote:
> Hi Yajun,
>
> On Wed, Nov 09, 2022 at 11:32:27AM +, Yajun Deng wrote:
>
>> November 9, 2022 6:55 PM, "Sachin Sant" wrote:
>>
>> On 09-Nov-2022, at 3:55 PM, Yajun Deng wrote:
>>
>> November 9, 2022 6:03 PM, "Yajun Deng" wrote:
>>
>> He
On Sun, Nov 06, 2022 at 04:07:42PM -0500, Nayna Jain wrote:
> securityfs is meant for Linux security subsystems to expose policies/logs
> or any other information. However, there are various firmware security
> features which expose their variables for user management via the kernel.
> There is cur
On Sun, Oct 23, 2022 at 10:32:08PM +0200, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
> The RNG always mixes in the Linux version extremely early in boot. It
> also always includes a cycle counter, not only during early boot, but
> each and every time it is invoked prior to being fully initialized.
> Together, this
On 11/9/22 08:46, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
On Sun, Nov 06, 2022 at 04:07:42PM -0500, Nayna Jain wrote:
securityfs is meant for Linux security subsystems to expose policies/logs
or any other information. However, there are various firmware security
features which expose their variables for use
+ linuxppc-dev list as we start mentioning powerpc.
Le 09/11/2022 à 18:43, Song Liu a écrit :
> On Wed, Nov 9, 2022 at 3:18 AM Mike Rapoport wrote:
>>
> [...]
>
The proposed execmem_alloc() looks to me very much tailored for x86
to be
used as a replacement for module_alloc().
On Thu, Nov 03, 2022 at 05:06:39PM -0400, Sean Anderson wrote:
> Several (later) patches in this series cannot be applied until a stable
> release has occured containing the dts updates.
New kernels must remain compatible with old device trees.
On Thu, Nov 03, 2022 at 05:06:39PM -0400, Sean Anderson wrote:
> For a long time, PCSs have been tightly coupled with their MACs. For
> this reason, the MAC creates the "phy" or mdio device, and then passes
> it to the PCS to initialize. This has a few disadvantages:
>
> - Each MAC must re-impleme
On Thu, 2022-07-28 at 16:31 +1000, Nicholas Piggin wrote:
> -#define queued_spin_lock queued_spin_lock
>
> -static inline void queued_spin_unlock(struct qspinlock *lock)
> +static __always_inline int queued_spin_trylock(struct qspinlock *lock)
> {
> - if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PARAVIRT_SPINLOC
On Thu, 2022-07-28 at 16:31 +1000, Nicholas Piggin wrote:
[resend as utf-8, not utf-7]
>
> +/*
> + * Bitfields in the atomic value:
> + *
> + * 0: locked bit
> + * 16-31: tail cpu (+1)
> + */
> +#define _Q_SET_MASK(type) (((1U << _Q_ ## type ## _BITS) - 1)\
> +
On Thu, 2022-07-28 at 16:31 +1000, Nicholas Piggin wrote:
[resend as utf-8, not utf-7]
> The first 16 bits of the lock are only modified by the owner, and other
> modifications always use atomic operations on the entire 32 bits, so
> unlocks can use plain stores on the 16 bits. This is the same kin
On Thu, 2022-07-28 at 16:31 +1000, Nicholas Piggin wrote:
[resend as utf-8, not utf-7]
> This uses more optimal ll/sc style access patterns (rather than
> cmpxchg), and also sets the EH=1 lock hint on those operations
> which acquire ownership of the lock.
> ---
> arch/powerpc/include/asm/qspinloc
On Thu, 2022-07-28 at 16:31 +1000, Nicholas Piggin wrote:
[resend as utf-8, not utf-7]
> Allow new waiters a number of spins on the lock word before queueing,
> which particularly helps paravirt performance when physical CPUs are
> oversubscribed.
> ---
> arch/powerpc/lib/qspinlock.c | 152 +++
On Thu, 2022-07-28 at 16:31 +1000, Nicholas Piggin wrote:
[resend as utf-8, not utf-7]
> Give the queue head the ability to stop stealers. After a number of
> spins without sucessfully acquiring the lock, the queue head employs
> this, which will assure it is the next owner.
> ---
> arch/powerpc/i
On Thu, 2022-07-28 at 16:31 +1000, Nicholas Piggin wrote:
[resend as utf-8, not utf-7]
> Store the owner CPU number in the lock word so it may be yielded to,
> as powerpc's paravirtualised simple spinlocks do.
> ---
> arch/powerpc/include/asm/qspinlock.h | 8 +++-
> arch/powerpc/include
On Thu, 2022-07-28 at 16:31 +1000, Nicholas Piggin wrote:
[resend as utf-8, not utf-7]
> Waiters spinning on the lock word should yield to the lock owner if the
> vCPU is preempted. This improves performance when the hypervisor has
> oversubscribed physical CPUs.
> ---
> arch/powerpc/lib/qspinlo
On Thu, 2022-07-28 at 16:31 +1000, Nicholas Piggin wrote:
[resend as utf-8, not utf-7]
> Queued waiters which are not at the head of the queue don't spin on
> the lock word but their qnode lock word, waiting for the previous queued
> CPU to release them. Add an option which allows these waiters to
On Thu, 2022-07-28 at 16:31 +1000, Nicholas Piggin wrote:
[resend as utf-8, not utf-7]
> If the head of queue is preventing stealing but it finds the owner vCPU
> is preempted, it will yield its cycles to the owner which could cause it
> to become preempted. Add an option to re-allow stealers befor
On Thu, 2022-07-28 at 16:31 +1000, Nicholas Piggin wrote:
[resend as utf-8, not utf-7]
> Having all CPUs poll the lock word for the owner CPU that should be
> yielded to defeats most of the purpose of using MCS queueing for
> scalability. Yet it may be desirable for queued waiters to to yield
> to
On Thu, 2022-07-28 at 16:31 +1000, Nicholas Piggin wrote:
[resend as utf-8, not utf-7]
> After the head of the queue acquires the lock, it releases the
> next waiter in the queue to become the new head. Add an option
> to prod the new head if its vCPU was preempted. This may only
> have an effect i
On Thu, 2022-07-28 at 16:31 +1000, Nicholas Piggin wrote:
[resend as utf-8, not utf-7]
> This gives trylock slightly more strength, and it also gives most
> of the benefit of passing 'val' back through the slowpath without
> the complexity.
> ---
> arch/powerpc/include/asm/qspinlock.h | 39 +++
On Thu, 2022-07-28 at 16:31 +1000, Nicholas Piggin wrote:
[resend as utf-8, not utf-7]
> Use the spin_begin/spin_cpu_relax/spin_end APIs in qspinlock, which helps
> to prevent threads issuing a lot of expensive priority nops which may not
> have much effect due to immediately executing low then med
On Thu, 2022-07-28 at 16:31 +1000, Nicholas Piggin wrote:
[resend as utf-8, not utf-7]
> Allow for a reduction in the number of times a CPU from a different
> node than the owner can attempt to steal the lock before queueing.
> This could bias the transfer behaviour of the lock across the
> machine
On Thu, 2022-07-28 at 16:31 +1000, Nicholas Piggin wrote:
[resend as utf-8, not utf-7]
> Provide an option that holds off queueing indefinitely while the lock
> owner is preempted. This could reduce queueing latencies for very
> overcommitted vcpu situations.
>
> This is disabled by default.
> ---
On Thu, 2022-07-28 at 16:31 +1000, Nicholas Piggin wrote:
[resend as utf-8, not utf-7]
> Finding the owner or a queued waiter on a lock with a preempted vcpu
> is indicative of an oversubscribed guest causing the lock to get into
> trouble. Provide some options to detect this situation and have new
On Wed, 2022-11-02 at 23:19 +, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> From: Chao Gao
>
> Disable CPU hotplug during hardware_enable_all() to prevent the corner
> case where if the following sequence occurs:
>
> 1. A hotplugged CPU marks itself online in cpu_online_mask
> 2. The hotplugged CPU enab
If device_register() returns error in ibmebus_bus_init(), name of kobject
which is allocated in dev_set_name() called in device_add() is leaked.
As comment of device_add() says, it should call put_device() to drop
the reference count that was set in device_initialize() when it fails,
so the name c
On Wed, 2022-11-02 at 23:19 +, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> From: Chao Gao
>
> Disable CPU hotplug during hardware_enable_all() to prevent the corner
> case where if the following sequence occurs:
>
> 1. A hotplugged CPU marks itself online in cpu_online_mask
> 2. The hotplugged CPU enab
On Wed, Nov 9, 2022 at 1:24 PM Christophe Leroy
wrote:
>
> + linuxppc-dev list as we start mentioning powerpc.
>
> Le 09/11/2022 à 18:43, Song Liu a écrit :
> > On Wed, Nov 9, 2022 at 3:18 AM Mike Rapoport wrote:
> >>
> > [...]
> >
>
> The proposed execmem_alloc() looks to me very much
On Thu, 2022-11-10 at 01:33 +, Huang, Kai wrote:
> > @@ -9283,7 +9283,13 @@ static int
> > kvm_x86_check_processor_compatibility(struct kvm_x86_init_ops *ops)
> > int cpu = smp_processor_id();
> > struct cpuinfo_x86 *c = &cpu_data(cpu);
> >
> > - WARN_ON(!irqs_disabled());
> > + /
On Thu, 2022-11-10 at 01:08 +, Huang, Kai wrote:
> > - WARN_ON(!irqs_disabled());
> > + /*
> > +* Compatibility checks are done when loading KVM and when enabling
> > +* hardware, e.g. during CPU hotplug, to ensure all online CPUs are
> > +* compatible, i.e. KVM should never per
Le 10/11/2022 à 01:35, Jordan Niethe a écrit :
> On Thu, 2022-07-28 at 16:31 +1000, Nicholas Piggin wrote:
>
>> -#define queued_spin_lock queued_spin_lock
>>
>> -static inline void queued_spin_unlock(struct qspinlock *lock)
>> +static __always_inline int queued_spin_trylock(struct qspinlock *
On Wed, 2022-11-02 at 23:19 +, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> From: Chao Gao
>
> The CPU STARTING section doesn't allow callbacks to fail. Move KVM's
> hotplug callback to ONLINE section so that it can abort onlining a
> CPU in
> certain cases to avoid potentially breaking VMs running on existi
On Wed, 2022-11-02 at 23:18 +, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> Define pr_fmt using KBUILD_MODNAME for all KVM x86 code so that
> printks
> use consistent formatting across common x86, Intel, and AMD code. In
> addition to providing consistent print formatting, using
> KBUILD_MODNAME,
> e.g. kvm_a
41 matches
Mail list logo
