on 2017/2/27 11:25, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
On 27/02/17 13:25, Michael Roth wrote:
Quoting Alexey Kardashevskiy (2017-02-22 22:20:25)
On 21/02/17 17:46, Yongji Xie wrote:
At the moment ram device's memory regions are NATIVE_ENDIAN. This does
not work on PPC64 because VFIO PCI device is li
On 27/02/17 13:25, Michael Roth wrote:
> Quoting Alexey Kardashevskiy (2017-02-22 22:20:25)
>> On 21/02/17 17:46, Yongji Xie wrote:
>>> At the moment ram device's memory regions are NATIVE_ENDIAN. This does
>>> not work on PPC64 because VFIO PCI device is little endian but PPC64
>>> always defines
Quoting Alexey Kardashevskiy (2017-02-22 22:20:25)
> On 21/02/17 17:46, Yongji Xie wrote:
> > At the moment ram device's memory regions are NATIVE_ENDIAN. This does
> > not work on PPC64 because VFIO PCI device is little endian but PPC64
> > always defines static macro TARGET_WORDS_BIGENDIAN.
> >
On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 12:43:37PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>
>
> On 23/02/2017 12:34, Peter Maydell wrote:
> > On 23 February 2017 at 10:33, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> On 23/02/2017 11:23, Peter Maydell wrote:
> >>> On 23 February 2017 at 10:10, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 23/02
On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 01:14:09AM +0800, Yongji Xie wrote:
> on 2017/2/24 0:15, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>
> >
> > On 23/02/2017 17:08, Peter Maydell wrote:
> > > On 23 February 2017 at 15:58, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> > > > However, DEVICE_NATIVE_ENDIAN would have to be paired with tswap, which
> > >
On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 03:29:53PM +, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 23 February 2017 at 15:21, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 23/02/2017 15:35, Peter Maydell wrote:
> >> On 23 February 2017 at 12:53, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On 23/02/2017 13:26, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 2
on 2017/2/24 0:15, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
On 23/02/2017 17:08, Peter Maydell wrote:
On 23 February 2017 at 15:58, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
However, DEVICE_NATIVE_ENDIAN would have to be paired with tswap, which
the current code does not do, hence the bug. To have no swap at all,
you'd need DEVICE
On 23/02/2017 17:08, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 23 February 2017 at 15:58, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> However, DEVICE_NATIVE_ENDIAN would have to be paired with tswap, which
>> the current code does not do, hence the bug. To have no swap at all,
>> you'd need DEVICE_HOST_ENDIAN.
>
> Yes, I agree t
On Thu, 23 Feb 2017 16:47:23 +0100
Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 23/02/2017 16:39, Alex Williamson wrote:
> > On Thu, 23 Feb 2017 16:21:47 +0100
> > Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> >
> >> On 23/02/2017 15:35, Peter Maydell wrote:
> >>> On 23 February 2017 at 12:53, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
On 23 February 2017 at 15:58, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>
>
> On 23/02/2017 16:29, Peter Maydell wrote:
>>> No, they look entirely the same. The only difference is that they go
>>> through MemoryRegionOps instead of memcpy.
>> Then we have a different problem, because the thing this patch
>> is claimi
On 23/02/2017 16:29, Peter Maydell wrote:
>> No, they look entirely the same. The only difference is that they go
>> through MemoryRegionOps instead of memcpy.
> Then we have a different problem, because the thing this patch
> is claiming to fix is that the memory the device is backed by
> (from
On 23/02/2017 16:39, Alex Williamson wrote:
> On Thu, 23 Feb 2017 16:21:47 +0100
> Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>
>> On 23/02/2017 15:35, Peter Maydell wrote:
>>> On 23 February 2017 at 12:53, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
On 23/02/2017 13:26, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 23 February 2017 a
On Thu, 23 Feb 2017 16:21:47 +0100
Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 23/02/2017 15:35, Peter Maydell wrote:
> > On 23 February 2017 at 12:53, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> On 23/02/2017 13:26, Peter Maydell wrote:
> >>> On 23 February 2017 at 11:43, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 23/02/2017
On 23 February 2017 at 15:21, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>
>
> On 23/02/2017 15:35, Peter Maydell wrote:
>> On 23 February 2017 at 12:53, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 23/02/2017 13:26, Peter Maydell wrote:
On 23 February 2017 at 11:43, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 23/02/2017 12:34, Peter
On 23/02/2017 15:35, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 23 February 2017 at 12:53, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 23/02/2017 13:26, Peter Maydell wrote:
>>> On 23 February 2017 at 11:43, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
On 23/02/2017 12:34, Peter Maydell wrote:
> We should probably update the doc comment
On 23 February 2017 at 12:53, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>
>
> On 23/02/2017 13:26, Peter Maydell wrote:
>> On 23 February 2017 at 11:43, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>>> On 23/02/2017 12:34, Peter Maydell wrote:
We should probably update the doc comment to note that the
pointer is to host-endianness
On 23/02/2017 13:26, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 23 February 2017 at 11:43, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> On 23/02/2017 12:34, Peter Maydell wrote:
>>> We should probably update the doc comment to note that the
>>> pointer is to host-endianness memory (and that this is not
>>> like normal RAM which is t
On 23 February 2017 at 11:43, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 23/02/2017 12:34, Peter Maydell wrote:
>> We should probably update the doc comment to note that the
>> pointer is to host-endianness memory (and that this is not
>> like normal RAM which is target-endian)...
>
> I wouldn't call it host-endia
On 23/02/2017 12:34, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 23 February 2017 at 10:33, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 23/02/2017 11:23, Peter Maydell wrote:
>>> On 23 February 2017 at 10:10, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
On 23/02/2017 11:02, Peter Maydell wrote:
> I'm really not convinced we need DEVICE_H
On 23 February 2017 at 10:33, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>
>
> On 23/02/2017 11:23, Peter Maydell wrote:
>> On 23 February 2017 at 10:10, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>>> On 23/02/2017 11:02, Peter Maydell wrote:
I'm really not convinced we need DEVICE_HOST_ENDIAN. RAM
areas should be target-endian (
On 23/02/17 19:35, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>
>
> On 23/02/2017 05:20, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
>> First, Paolo is right and ram_device_mem_ops::endianness should be
>> host-endian which happens to be little in our test case (ppc64le)
>
> So you tested a ppc64 BE guest and it works?
Yes. Setting
On 23/02/2017 11:23, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 23 February 2017 at 10:10, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> On 23/02/2017 11:02, Peter Maydell wrote:
>>> I'm really not convinced we need DEVICE_HOST_ENDIAN. RAM
>>> areas should be target-endian (you can probably define
>>> "target endianness" as "the endi
On 23 February 2017 at 10:10, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 23/02/2017 11:02, Peter Maydell wrote:
>> I'm really not convinced we need DEVICE_HOST_ENDIAN. RAM
>> areas should be target-endian (you can probably define
>> "target endianness" as "the endianness that RAM areas have".)
>
> This is not RAM.
On 23/02/2017 11:02, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 23 February 2017 at 08:35, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 23/02/2017 05:20, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
>>> First, Paolo is right and ram_device_mem_ops::endianness should be
>>> host-endian which happens to be little in our test case (ppc64le)
>>
On 23 February 2017 at 08:35, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>
>
> On 23/02/2017 05:20, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
>> First, Paolo is right and ram_device_mem_ops::endianness should be
>> host-endian which happens to be little in our test case (ppc64le)
>
> So you tested a ppc64 BE guest and it works?
>
>>
On 23/02/2017 05:20, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
> First, Paolo is right and ram_device_mem_ops::endianness should be
> host-endian which happens to be little in our test case (ppc64le)
So you tested a ppc64 BE guest and it works?
> Keep things where they are in the VFIO department and just fix
On 21/02/17 17:46, Yongji Xie wrote:
> At the moment ram device's memory regions are NATIVE_ENDIAN. This does
> not work on PPC64 because VFIO PCI device is little endian but PPC64
> always defines static macro TARGET_WORDS_BIGENDIAN.
>
> This fixes endianness for ram device the same way as it is
On 21/02/2017 19:44, Alex Williamson wrote:
>>> In other words, would Yongji's patch just work if it used
>>> DEVICE_BIG_ENDIAN and beNN_to_cpu/cpu_to_beNN? If so, then I think the
>>> patch is okay.
>
> The part where I get lost is that if PPC64 always sets the target
> to big endian, then ad
on 2017/2/22 2:44, Alex Williamson wrote:
On Tue, 21 Feb 2017 18:09:04 +
Peter Maydell wrote:
On 21 February 2017 at 16:34, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
On 21/02/2017 17:21, Alex Williamson wrote:
On Tue, 21 Feb 2017 14:46:55 +0800
Yongji Xie wrote:
At the moment ram device's memory regi
On 21 February 2017 at 18:53, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 21/02/2017 19:09, Peter Maydell wrote:
>> In this instance I don't understand the patch. The ram_device
>> mem-ops are there to deal with memory regions backed by a
>> lump of RAM, right? Lumps of memory are always the endianness
>> of the ho
On 21/02/2017 19:09, Peter Maydell wrote:
> In this instance I don't understand the patch. The ram_device
> mem-ops are there to deal with memory regions backed by a
> lump of RAM, right? Lumps of memory are always the endianness
> of the host CPU by definition, so DEVICE_NATIVE_ENDIAN and
> no s
On Tue, 21 Feb 2017 18:09:04 +
Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 21 February 2017 at 16:34, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 21/02/2017 17:21, Alex Williamson wrote:
> >> On Tue, 21 Feb 2017 14:46:55 +0800
> >> Yongji Xie wrote:
> >>
> >>> At the moment ram device's memory regions are NATIVE
On 21 February 2017 at 16:34, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>
>
> On 21/02/2017 17:21, Alex Williamson wrote:
>> On Tue, 21 Feb 2017 14:46:55 +0800
>> Yongji Xie wrote:
>>
>>> At the moment ram device's memory regions are NATIVE_ENDIAN. This does
>>> not work on PPC64 because VFIO PCI device is little end
On 21/02/2017 17:21, Alex Williamson wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Feb 2017 14:46:55 +0800
> Yongji Xie wrote:
>
>> At the moment ram device's memory regions are NATIVE_ENDIAN. This does
>> not work on PPC64 because VFIO PCI device is little endian but PPC64
>> always defines static macro TARGET_WORDS_BI
On Tue, 21 Feb 2017 14:46:55 +0800
Yongji Xie wrote:
> At the moment ram device's memory regions are NATIVE_ENDIAN. This does
> not work on PPC64 because VFIO PCI device is little endian but PPC64
> always defines static macro TARGET_WORDS_BIGENDIAN.
>
> This fixes endianness for ram device the
At the moment ram device's memory regions are NATIVE_ENDIAN. This does
not work on PPC64 because VFIO PCI device is little endian but PPC64
always defines static macro TARGET_WORDS_BIGENDIAN.
This fixes endianness for ram device the same way as it is done
for VFIO region in commit 6758008e2c4e79fb
36 matches
Mail list logo
