On Sun, 27 Nov 2022 19:43:47 -0800, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> This gets rid of the last references to smp_read_barrier_depends()
> which for the kernel side was removed in v5.9. The serialization
> required for Alpha is done inside READ_ONCE() instead of having
> users deal with it. Simply use a f
On Sun, 27 Nov 2022 19:43:46 -0800, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> __read_once_size() is not a macro, remove those '/'s.
>
> Signed-off-by: Davidlohr Bueso
Reviewed-by: Xuan Zhuo
> ---
> tools/virtio/ringtest/main.h | 20 ++--
> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>
>
This gets rid of the last references to smp_read_barrier_depends()
which for the kernel side was removed in v5.9. The serialization
required for Alpha is done inside READ_ONCE() instead of having
users deal with it. Simply use a full barrier, the architecture
does not have rmb in the first place.
Hi,
To my surprise, this call is still git-greppable in the
tree, the kernel having gotten rid of it a while back.
Thanks!
Davidlohr Bueso (2):
tools/virtio: remove stray characters
tools/virtio: remove smp_read_barrier_depends()
tools/virtio/ringtest/main.h | 37 +++---
__read_once_size() is not a macro, remove those '/'s.
Signed-off-by: Davidlohr Bueso
---
tools/virtio/ringtest/main.h | 20 ++--
1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tools/virtio/ringtest/main.h b/tools/virtio/ringtest/main.h
index 6d1fccd3d86c..9ed09ca
Btw, after you add the check to vduse_validate_config() you can test
that it silences the Smatch warning by doing:
kchecker --info drivers/vdpa/vdpa_user/vduse_dev.c | tee out
~/smatch/smatch_data/db/reload_partial.sh out
kchecker drivers/vdpa/vdpa_user/vduse_dev.c
You might need to do a second -
On Mon, Nov 28, 2022 at 10:56 AM Longpeng(Mike) wrote:
>
> From: Longpeng
>
> Support doorbell mapping for vdpasim devices, then we can test the notify
> passthrough feature even if there's no real hardware on hand.
You can use vp_vdpa in L1 plus page_ver_vq in L0 to test it in L2.
That is how I
On November 27, 2022 7:03:20 PM PST, Hou Wenlong
wrote:
>On Sun, Nov 27, 2022 at 09:24:34AM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> On November 24, 2022 3:51:53 AM PST, Hou Wenlong
>> wrote:
>> >Similar to the alternative patching, use relative reference for original
>> >instruction rather than absolut
On November 24, 2022 3:51:53 AM PST, Hou Wenlong
wrote:
>Similar to the alternative patching, use relative reference for original
>instruction rather than absolute one, which saves 8 bytes for one entry
>on x86_64. And it could generate R_X86_64_PC32 relocation instead of
>R_X86_64_64 relocation
On Sun, Nov 27, 2022 at 08:16:24AM +0530, Harshit Mogalapalli wrote:
> Hi Micheal,
>
> On 27/11/22 4:52 am, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 25, 2022 at 07:59:58PM -0800, Harshit Mogalapalli wrote:
> > > As 'dev->vq_num' is user-controlled data, if user tries to allocate
> > > memory larg
10 matches
Mail list logo