Hi Stefano,
On 25.03.2022 02:32, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Mar 2022, Bertrand Marquis wrote:
>> cppcheck can be used to check Xen code quality.
>>
>> To create a report do "make cppcheck" on a built tree adding any options
>> you added during the process you used to build xen (like CR
On 25.03.2022 01:30, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> Maybe, instead of exporting get_free_port, we could create a new
> function in xen/common/event_channel.c and mark it as __init? This way:
> - we don't need to expose get_free_port
> - the new function would only be __init anyway, so no risk of runti
On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 09:10:57PM -0400, Demi Marie Obenour wrote:
> On 3/24/22 18:21, Marek Marczykowski-Górecki wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 11:49:14AM -0400, Demi Marie Obenour wrote:
> >> On 3/24/22 10:11, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> >>> On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 09:56:29AM -0400, Demi Marie
On 24.03.2022 18:02, Tamas K Lengyel wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 12:44 PM Roger Pau Monné wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 12:22:49PM -0400, Tamas K Lengyel wrote:
>>> On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 12:04 PM Roger Pau Monné
>>> wrote:
On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 11:52:38AM -0400, Tamas K
Hi Stefano,
> On 25 Mar 2022, at 02:00, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
>
> From: Stefano Stabellini
>
> The first 32 bytes of zImage are NOPs. When CONFIG_EFI is enabled in the
> kernel, certain versions of Linux will use an UNPREDICATABLE NOP
> encoding, sometimes resulting in an unbootable kernel
Hi Stefano,
On 25/03/2022 01:00, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
From: Stefano Stabellini
The first 32 bytes of zImage are NOPs. When CONFIG_EFI is enabled in the
kernel, certain versions of Linux will use an UNPREDICATABLE NOP
typo: s/UNPREDICATABLE/UNPREDICTABLE/
I will fix it on commit.
Acked
Hi Wei,
On 25/03/2022 02:51, Wei Chen wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Xen-devel On Behalf Of
Stefano Stabellini
Sent: 2022年3月25日 9:01
To: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
Cc: jul...@xen.org; sstabell...@kernel.org; Bertrand Marquis
; volodymyr_babc...@epam.com; Stefano Stabellini
Subject
flight 168836 libvirt real [real]
http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/168836/
Regressions :-(
Tests which did not succeed and are blocking,
including tests which could not be run:
build-armhf-libvirt 6 libvirt-buildfail REGR. vs. 151777
build-amd64-libvirt
flight 168837 ovmf real [real]
http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/168837/
Regressions :-(
Tests which did not succeed and are blocking,
including tests which could not be run:
build-amd64-xsm 6 xen-buildfail REGR. vs. 168254
build-amd64
On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 12:27:02PM -0400, Tamas K Lengyel wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 11:51 AM Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 11:15:08AM -0400, Tamas K Lengyel wrote:
> > > On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 10:50 AM Roger Pau Monné
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Mar 22,
On Fri, Mar 25, 2022, 5:04 AM Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 24.03.2022 18:02, Tamas K Lengyel wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 12:44 PM Roger Pau Monné
> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 12:22:49PM -0400, Tamas K Lengyel wrote:
> >>> On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 12:04 PM Roger Pau Monné
> wrote:
On Fri, Mar 25, 2022, 6:25 AM Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 12:27:02PM -0400, Tamas K Lengyel wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 11:51 AM Roger Pau Monné
> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 11:15:08AM -0400, Tamas K Lengyel wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 10:50
flight 168833 xen-unstable real [real]
http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/168833/
Failures :-/ but no regressions.
Tests which are failing intermittently (not blocking):
test-armhf-armhf-xl-rtds 18 guest-start/debian.repeat fail pass in 168825
Tests which did not succeed, but
On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 01:41:37PM -0400, Tamas K Lengyel wrote:
> Add option to the fork memop to skip populating the fork with special pages.
> These special pages are only necessary when setting up forks to be fully
> functional with a toolstack. For short-lived forks where no toolstack is
> ac
On 23.03.22 02:21, Jakub Kądziołka wrote:
If a xen domain with at least two VCPUs has a PCI device attached which
enters the D3hot state during suspend, the kernel may hang while
resuming, depending on the core on which an async resume task gets
scheduled.
The bug occurs because xen's do_suspend
On Fri, Mar 25, 2022, 6:59 AM Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 01:41:37PM -0400, Tamas K Lengyel wrote:
> > Add option to the fork memop to skip populating the fork with special
> pages.
> > These special pages are only necessary when setting up forks to be fully
> > functional wi
On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 07:15:59AM -0400, Tamas K Lengyel wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 25, 2022, 6:59 AM Roger Pau Monné wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 01:41:37PM -0400, Tamas K Lengyel wrote:
> > > Add option to the fork memop to skip populating the fork with special
> > pages.
> > > These special
On 24.03.2022 12:04, Bertrand Marquis wrote:
> cppcheck can be used to check Xen code quality.
>
> To create a report do "make cppcheck" on a built tree adding any options
> you added during the process you used to build xen (like CROSS_COMPILE
> or XEN_TARGET_ARCH). This will generate an xml repo
On Fri, Mar 25, 2022, 7:31 AM Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 07:15:59AM -0400, Tamas K Lengyel wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 25, 2022, 6:59 AM Roger Pau Monné
> wrote:
> >
> > > On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 01:41:37PM -0400, Tamas K Lengyel wrote:
> > > > Add option to the fork memop to sk
On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 06:48:42AM -0400, Tamas K Lengyel wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 25, 2022, 5:04 AM Jan Beulich wrote:
>
> > On 24.03.2022 18:02, Tamas K Lengyel wrote:
> > > On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 12:44 PM Roger Pau Monné
> > wrote:
> > >>
> > >> On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 12:22:49PM -0400, Tamas K
Hi Jan,
> On 25 Mar 2022, at 12:43, Jan Beulich wrote:
>
> On 24.03.2022 12:04, Bertrand Marquis wrote:
>> cppcheck can be used to check Xen code quality.
>>
>> To create a report do "make cppcheck" on a built tree adding any options
>> you added during the process you used to build xen (like
Hi Julien,
> On 9 Mar 2022, at 12:20, Julien Grall wrote:
>
> From: Julien Grall
>
> Xen is currently not fully compliant with the Arm because it will
I think you wanted to say “arm arm” her.
> switch the TTBR with the MMU on.
>
> In order to be compliant, we need to disable the MMU before
>
During VM forking and resetting a failed vmentry has been observed due
to the guest non-register state going out-of-sync with the guest register
state. For example, a VM fork reset right after a STI instruction can trigger
the failed entry. This is due to the guest non-register state not being save
Hi Julien,
> On 9 Mar 2022, at 12:20, Julien Grall wrote:
>
> From: Julien GralL
>
> In follow-up patches we will need to have part of Xen identity mapped in
> order to safely switch the TTBR.
>
> On some platform, the identity mapping may have to start at 0. If we always
> keep the identity
On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 01:41:39PM -0400, Tamas K Lengyel wrote:
> diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/mm/mem_sharing.c b/xen/arch/x86/mm/mem_sharing.c
> index a21c781452..bfa6082f13 100644
> --- a/xen/arch/x86/mm/mem_sharing.c
> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/mm/mem_sharing.c
> @@ -1892,15 +1892,19 @@ static int fork(s
On 25/03/2022 13:17, Bertrand Marquis wrote:
Hi Julien,
Hi,
On 9 Mar 2022, at 12:20, Julien Grall wrote:
From: Julien Grall
Xen is currently not fully compliant with the Arm because it will
I think you wanted to say “arm arm” her.
Yes. I will update it.
switch the TTBR with the
On 25/03/2022 13:32, Bertrand Marquis wrote:
Hi Julien,
Hi,
On 9 Mar 2022, at 12:20, Julien Grall wrote:
From: Julien GralL
In follow-up patches we will need to have part of Xen identity mapped in
order to safely switch the TTBR.
On some platform, the identity mapping may have to star
Hi Julien,
> On 9 Mar 2022, at 12:20, Julien Grall wrote:
>
> From: Julien Grall
>
> At the moment, switch_ttbr() is switching the TTBR whilst the MMU is
> still on.
>
> Switching TTBR is like replacing existing mappings with new ones. So
> we need to follow the break-before-make sequence.
>
On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 9:42 AM Roger Pau Monné wrote:
>
> On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 01:41:39PM -0400, Tamas K Lengyel wrote:
> > diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/mm/mem_sharing.c b/xen/arch/x86/mm/mem_sharing.c
> > index a21c781452..bfa6082f13 100644
> > --- a/xen/arch/x86/mm/mem_sharing.c
> > +++ b/xen/a
flight 168844 ovmf real [real]
http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/168844/
Regressions :-(
Tests which did not succeed and are blocking,
including tests which could not be run:
build-amd64-xsm 6 xen-buildfail REGR. vs. 168254
build-amd64
Hi Julien,
> On 25 Mar 2022, at 14:35, Julien Grall wrote:
>
>
>
> On 25/03/2022 13:17, Bertrand Marquis wrote:
>> Hi Julien,
>
> Hi,
>
>>> On 9 Mar 2022, at 12:20, Julien Grall wrote:
>>>
>>> From: Julien Grall
>>>
>>> Xen is currently not fully compliant with the Arm because it will
>>
Ping?
There was some discussion on whether we need to handle such empty
sections, but I think we settled that it's necessary.
Thanks, Roger.
On Thu, Mar 17, 2022 at 12:08:53PM +0100, Roger Pau Monne wrote:
> A side effect of ignoring such sections is that symbols belonging to
> them won't be res
On 25.03.2022 13:57, Bertrand Marquis wrote:
>> On 25 Mar 2022, at 12:43, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 24.03.2022 12:04, Bertrand Marquis wrote:
>>> --- a/xen/include/xen/kconfig.h
>>> +++ b/xen/include/xen/kconfig.h
>>> @@ -8,6 +8,10 @@
>>> * these only work with boolean option.
>>> */
>>>
>>> +/*
Hi Julien
> On 25 Mar 2022, at 14:48, Julien Grall wrote:
>
>
>
> On 25/03/2022 13:32, Bertrand Marquis wrote:
>> Hi Julien,
>
> Hi,
>
>>> On 9 Mar 2022, at 12:20, Julien Grall wrote:
>>>
>>> From: Julien GralL
>>>
>>> In follow-up patches we will need to have part of Xen identity mapped
Pull the XSM check up out of unmap_domain_pirq into physdev_map_pirq.
xsm_unmap_domain_irq was seen denying unmap_domain_pirq when called from
complete_domain_destroy as an RCU callback. The source context was an
unexpected, random domain. Since this is a xen-internal operation,
going through th
is_xen_pmu() is taking the cpu number as parameter, but it is not using
it. Instead it just tests whether the Xen PMU initialization on the
current cpu did succeed. As this test is done by checking a percpu
pointer, preemption needs to be disabled in order to avoid switching
the cpu while doing the
flight 168841 xen-unstable-smoke real [real]
http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/168841/
Failures :-/ but no regressions.
Tests which did not succeed, but are not blocking:
test-amd64-amd64-libvirt 15 migrate-support-checkfail never pass
test-arm64-arm64-xl-xsm 1
On 25/03/2022 13:47, Bertrand Marquis wrote:
Hi Julien,
Hi Bertrand,
On 9 Mar 2022, at 12:20, Julien Grall wrote:
From: Julien Grall
At the moment, switch_ttbr() is switching the TTBR whilst the MMU is
still on.
Switching TTBR is like replacing existing mappings with new ones. So
we n
Hi Jan,
> On 25 Mar 2022, at 15:10, Jan Beulich wrote:
>
> On 25.03.2022 13:57, Bertrand Marquis wrote:
>>> On 25 Mar 2022, at 12:43, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>> On 24.03.2022 12:04, Bertrand Marquis wrote:
--- a/xen/include/xen/kconfig.h
+++ b/xen/include/xen/kconfig.h
@@ -8,6 +8,10
On 25.03.2022 15:28, Bertrand Marquis wrote:
>> On 25 Mar 2022, at 15:10, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 25.03.2022 13:57, Bertrand Marquis wrote:
On 25 Mar 2022, at 12:43, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 24.03.2022 12:04, Bertrand Marquis wrote:
> --- a/xen/include/xen/kconfig.h
> +++ b/xen/in
Hi Julien,
> On 25 Mar 2022, at 15:24, Julien Grall wrote:
>
>
>
> On 25/03/2022 13:47, Bertrand Marquis wrote:
>> Hi Julien,
>
> Hi Bertrand,
>
>>> On 9 Mar 2022, at 12:20, Julien Grall wrote:
>>>
>>> From: Julien Grall
>>>
>>> At the moment, switch_ttbr() is switching the TTBR whilst t
Hi,
On 25/03/2022 14:05, Bertrand Marquis wrote:
On 25 Mar 2022, at 14:35, Julien Grall wrote:
On 25/03/2022 13:17, Bertrand Marquis wrote:
Hi Julien,
Hi,
On 9 Mar 2022, at 12:20, Julien Grall wrote:
From: Julien Grall
Xen is currently not fully compliant with the Arm because it wil
Hi Bertrand,
On 25/03/2022 14:35, Bertrand Marquis wrote:
On 25 Mar 2022, at 15:24, Julien Grall wrote:
On 25/03/2022 13:47, Bertrand Marquis wrote:
Hi Julien,
Hi Bertrand,
On 9 Mar 2022, at 12:20, Julien Grall wrote:
From: Julien Grall
At the moment, switch_ttbr() is switching the TTB
Hi Julien,
> On 25 Mar 2022, at 15:42, Julien Grall wrote:
>
> Hi Bertrand,
>
> On 25/03/2022 14:35, Bertrand Marquis wrote:
>>> On 25 Mar 2022, at 15:24, Julien Grall wrote:
>>> On 25/03/2022 13:47, Bertrand Marquis wrote:
Hi Julien,
>>>
>>> Hi Bertrand,
>>>
> On 9 Mar 2022, at 12:
flight 168835 qemu-mainline real [real]
http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/168835/
Failures :-/ but no regressions.
Tests which did not succeed, but are not blocking:
test-amd64-amd64-xl-qemuu-win7-amd64 19 guest-stopfail like 168828
test-armhf-armhf-libvirt 16 sav
flight 168854 ovmf real [real]
http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/168854/
Regressions :-(
Tests which did not succeed and are blocking,
including tests which could not be run:
build-amd64-xsm 6 xen-buildfail REGR. vs. 168254
build-amd64
On 3/24/22 20:30, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> On Wed, 23 Mar 2022, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 23.03.2022 01:22, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
>>> On Tue, 15 Mar 2022, Daniel P. Smith wrote:
On 1/28/22 16:33, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> From: Luca Miccio
>
> The xenstore event channel wi
Linux’s netfront and blkfront drivers recently had a security
vulnerability (XSA-396) that allowed a malicious backend to potentially
compromise them. In follow-up audits, I found that OpenBSD’s xnf(4)
currently trusts the backend domain. I reported this privately to Theo
de Raadt, who indicated
(add Arnd to CC)
Juergen Gross writes:
> [[PGP Signed Part:Undecided]]
> On 24.03.22 02:42, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
>> I am pretty sure the reasons have to do with old x86 PV guests, so I am
>> CCing Juergen and Boris.
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> While we've been working on the rust-vmm virtio backe
flight 168858 ovmf real [real]
http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/168858/
Regressions :-(
Tests which did not succeed and are blocking,
including tests which could not be run:
build-amd64-xsm 6 xen-buildfail REGR. vs. 168254
build-amd64
On 09/03/2022 13:03, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 09.03.2022 13:39, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>> --- a/CHANGELOG.md
>> +++ b/CHANGELOG.md
>> @@ -6,6 +6,12 @@ The format is based on [Keep a
>> Changelog](https://keepachangelog.com/en/1.0.0/)
>>
>> ## [unstable
>> UNRELEASED](https://xenbits.xen.org/gitwe
On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 11:46 AM Daniel P. Smith wrote:
>
> On 3/24/22 20:30, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > On Wed, 23 Mar 2022, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >> On 23.03.2022 01:22, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> >>> The existing XSM check in evtchn_alloc_unbound cannot work and should
> >>> not work: it is
Hi Daniel,
On 25/03/2022 15:45, Daniel P. Smith wrote:
The existing XSM check in evtchn_alloc_unbound cannot work and should
not work: it is based on the current domain having enough privileges to
create the event channel. In this case, we have no current domain at
all. The current domain is Xen
Hi Stefano,
On 25/03/2022 00:30, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Wed, 23 Mar 2022, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 23.03.2022 01:22, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Tue, 15 Mar 2022, Daniel P. Smith wrote:
On 1/28/22 16:33, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
From: Luca Miccio
The xenstore event channel will be all
flight 168859 ovmf real [real]
http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/168859/
Regressions :-(
Tests which did not succeed and are blocking,
including tests which could not be run:
build-amd64-xsm 6 xen-buildfail REGR. vs. 168254
build-amd64
Hi Stefano,
On 23/03/2022 00:08, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Sat, 29 Jan 2022, Julien Grall wrote:
diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/domain_build.c b/xen/arch/arm/domain_build.c
index 6931c022a2..9144d6c0b6 100644
--- a/xen/arch/arm/domain_build.c
+++ b/xen/arch/arm/domain_build.c
@@ -2963,6 +2963,7 @
Hi Stefano,
On 23/03/2022 01:18, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Sat, 29 Jan 2022, Julien Grall wrote:
On 28/01/2022 21:33, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
+rc = evtchn_alloc_unbound(&alloc, true);
+if ( rc )
+{
+printk("Failed allocating event channel for domain\n");
+retur
On 3/25/22 10:20 AM, Juergen Gross wrote:
is_xen_pmu() is taking the cpu number as parameter, but it is not using
it. Instead it just tests whether the Xen PMU initialization on the
current cpu did succeed. As this test is done by checking a percpu
pointer, preemption needs to be disabled in or
flight 168838 linux-linus real [real]
flight 168861 linux-linus real-retest [real]
http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/168838/
http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/168861/
Failures :-/ but no regressions.
Tests which are failing intermittently (not blocking):
test-arm64-
On Fri, 25 Mar 2022, Michal Orzel wrote:
> On 25.03.2022 02:32, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > On Thu, 24 Mar 2022, Bertrand Marquis wrote:
> >> cppcheck can be used to check Xen code quality.
> >>
> >> To create a report do "make cppcheck" on a built tree adding any options
> >> you added during th
flight 168860 xen-unstable-smoke real [real]
http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/168860/
Failures :-/ but no regressions.
Tests which did not succeed, but are not blocking:
test-amd64-amd64-libvirt 15 migrate-support-checkfail never pass
test-arm64-arm64-xl-xsm 1
On Fri, 25 Mar 2022, Julien Grall wrote:
> So to me, the idea of switching to a "fake" domain or bypassing the check is
> more appealing. I have a preference for the "fake" domain here.
As a maintainer, I am not opposed to the "fake"/"contructor" domain
concept. It all depends on how many instanc
On 3/25/22 18:42, Chris Cappuccio wrote:
> Demi Marie Obenour [d...@invisiblethingslab.com] wrote:
>> Linux???s netfront and blkfront drivers recently had a security
>> vulnerability (XSA-396) that allowed a malicious backend to potentially
>> compromise them. In follow-up audits, I found that Ope
flight 168855 xen-unstable real [real]
http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/168855/
Failures :-/ but no regressions.
Tests which did not succeed, but are not blocking:
test-amd64-amd64-xl-qemut-win7-amd64 19 guest-stopfail like 168833
test-armhf-armhf-libvirt 16 save
Demi Marie Obenour [d...@invisiblethingslab.com] wrote:
> Linux???s netfront and blkfront drivers recently had a security
> vulnerability (XSA-396) that allowed a malicious backend to potentially
> compromise them. In follow-up audits, I found that OpenBSD???s xnf(4)
> currently trusts the backend
On 25/03/2022 22:42, Chris Cappuccio wrote:
> Demi Marie Obenour [d...@invisiblethingslab.com] wrote:
>> Linux???s netfront and blkfront drivers recently had a security
>> vulnerability (XSA-396) that allowed a malicious backend to potentially
>> compromise them. In follow-up audits, I found that
On Thu, 24 Mar 2022, Luca Fancellu wrote:
> Introduce a way to create different cpupools at boot time, this is
> particularly useful on ARM big.LITTLE system where there might be the
> need to have different cpupools for each type of core, but also
> systems using NUMA can have different cpu pools
flight 168865 ovmf real [real]
http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/168865/
Regressions :-(
Tests which did not succeed and are blocking,
including tests which could not be run:
build-amd64-xsm 6 xen-buildfail REGR. vs. 168254
build-amd64
flight 168856 qemu-mainline real [real]
http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/168856/
Failures :-/ but no regressions.
Tests which did not succeed, but are not blocking:
test-amd64-amd64-xl-qemuu-win7-amd64 19 guest-stopfail like 168835
test-armhf-armhf-libvirt 16 sav
69 matches
Mail list logo
