search for: gcosta

Change Makefile so vsmp_64.o object is dependent on PARAVIRT, rather than X86_VSMP Signed-off-by: Glauber Costa <gcosta@redhat.com> Signed-off-by: Ravikiran Thirumalai <kiran@scalemp.com> Acked-by: Shai Fultheim <shai@scalemp.com> --- arch/x86/kernel/Makefile | 2 +- 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/Makefile b/arch/x86/kernel/Makefile index 21dc1a0..71...

Hi, This series corresponds do older patches in the paravirt series that was neither already applied, nor I will touch again. In general, they do not touch code that can be unified (at least, without being the unification a big problem on its own). They passed through this list a lot of times, so I feel them ready for inclusion, unless someone opposes. As with the other patches, they apply to

Hi, This series corresponds do older patches in the paravirt series that was neither already applied, nor I will touch again. In general, they do not touch code that can be unified (at least, without being the unification a big problem on its own). They passed through this list a lot of times, so I feel them ready for inclusion, unless someone opposes. As with the other patches, they apply to

Right now, I have lguest in-tree module compiling on x86_64. It's not yet on a sendable state, since the module itself isn't loading. However, this subset of the series is pretty straightforward, and I'm sending it now aiming at reducing the delta size in the future ;-) Have fun,

Right now, I have lguest in-tree module compiling on x86_64. It's not yet on a sendable state, since the module itself isn't loading. However, this subset of the series is pretty straightforward, and I'm sending it now aiming at reducing the delta size in the future ;-) Have fun,

Hello, This series of patches integrates msr.h header. What it really does, is a series of steps to allow us to get rid of duplicate code between i386 and x86_64 versions With this done, achieving paravirt for x86_64 gets really easy, just a couple of extra code. The first patch was already sent a while ago, but was not yet pushed to any tree , to my knowledge. So it is sent again. Also,

Hello, This series of patches integrates msr.h header. What it really does, is a series of steps to allow us to get rid of duplicate code between i386 and x86_64 versions With this done, achieving paravirt for x86_64 gets really easy, just a couple of extra code. The first patch was already sent a while ago, but was not yet pushed to any tree , to my knowledge. So it is sent again. Also,

Hi, This small series provides some more fixes towards the goal to have the PARAVIRT selectable for x86_64. After that, just some more small steps are needed. The first fix is not even specific for PARAVIRT, and it's actually preventing the whole tree from booting.

Hi, This small series provides some more fixes towards the goal to have the PARAVIRT selectable for x86_64. After that, just some more small steps are needed. The first fix is not even specific for PARAVIRT, and it's actually preventing the whole tree from booting.

If we're not gonna do anything (case in which failure is already reported), we do not need to even bother with calculating the linear rip. This is a nitpick, but I saw it while doing some testing, so here's the patch. Signed-off-by: Glauber Costa <gcosta at redhat.com> --- arch/x86/kvm/x86.c | 4 ++-- 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c index 77fb2bd..191fef1 100644 --- a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c @@ -2026,11 +2026,11 @@ void kvm_report_emulation_failure(str...

If we're not gonna do anything (case in which failure is already reported), we do not need to even bother with calculating the linear rip. This is a nitpick, but I saw it while doing some testing, so here's the patch. Signed-off-by: Glauber Costa <gcosta at redhat.com> --- arch/x86/kvm/x86.c | 4 ++-- 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c index 77fb2bd..191fef1 100644 --- a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c @@ -2026,11 +2026,11 @@ void kvm_report_emulation_failure(str...

Hi folks, After some time away from it, and a big rebase as a consequence, here is the updated version of paravirt_ops for x86_64, heading to inclusion. Your criticism is of course, very welcome. Have fun -- arch/x86_64/Kconfig | 11 arch/x86_64/ia32/syscall32.c | 2 arch/x86_64/kernel/Makefile | 1 arch/x86_64/kernel/apic.c | 2

Hi folks, After some time away from it, and a big rebase as a consequence, here is the updated version of paravirt_ops for x86_64, heading to inclusion. Your criticism is of course, very welcome. Have fun -- arch/x86_64/Kconfig | 11 arch/x86_64/ia32/syscall32.c | 2 arch/x86_64/kernel/Makefile | 1 arch/x86_64/kernel/apic.c | 2

Hey folks, Here's a new spin of the pvops64 patch series. We didn't get that many comments from the last time, so it should be probably almost ready to get in. Heya! >From the last version, the most notable changes are: * consolidation of system.h, merging jeremy's comments about ordering concerns * consolidation of smp functions that goes through smp_ops. They're sharing

Hey folks, Here's a new spin of the pvops64 patch series. We didn't get that many comments from the last time, so it should be probably almost ready to get in. Heya! >From the last version, the most notable changes are: * consolidation of system.h, merging jeremy's comments about ordering concerns * consolidation of smp functions that goes through smp_ops. They're sharing

Here is an slightly updated version of the paravirt_ops patch. If your comments and criticism were welcome before, now it's even more! There are some issues that are _not_ addressed in this revision, and here are the causes: * split debugreg into multiple functions, suggested by Andi: - Me and jsfg agree that introducing more pvops (specially 14!) is not worthwhile. So, although we do

Here is an slightly updated version of the paravirt_ops patch. If your comments and criticism were welcome before, now it's even more! There are some issues that are _not_ addressed in this revision, and here are the causes: * split debugreg into multiple functions, suggested by Andi: - Me and jsfg agree that introducing more pvops (specially 14!) is not worthwhile. So, although we do

By Andi Kleen's suggestion, this patch removes pack_ldt() and pack_tss() wrappers in favour of a general wrapper. It saves us an ifdef and some lines of code, but more importantly, it's more elegant. No functional change is made. Signed-off-by: Glauber de Oliveira Costa <gcosta@redhat.com> --- include/asm-x86/desc.h | 55 ++++++++++++++--------------------------------- 1 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 38 deletions(-) diff --git a/include/asm-x86/desc.h b/include/asm-x86/desc.h index 8849666..e302a02 100644 --- a/include/asm-x86/desc.h +++ b/include/asm-x86/desc.h...

By Andi Kleen's suggestion, this patch removes pack_ldt() and pack_tss() wrappers in favour of a general wrapper. It saves us an ifdef and some lines of code, but more importantly, it's more elegant. No functional change is made. Signed-off-by: Glauber de Oliveira Costa <gcosta@redhat.com> --- include/asm-x86/desc.h | 55 ++++++++++++++--------------------------------- 1 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 38 deletions(-) diff --git a/include/asm-x86/desc.h b/include/asm-x86/desc.h index 8849666..e302a02 100644 --- a/include/asm-x86/desc.h +++ b/include/asm-x86/desc.h...

Hi, At Ingo's request, here it goes a new patchset, that actually applies ontop of the x86 tree (mm branch). Besides this issue, I've also included a patch that remove the cr8 references, as Andi suggested.