search for: herrenschmidt

On 2016?06?03? 09:32, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > On Fri, 2016-06-03 at 11:32 +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: >> On Thu, 2016-06-02 at 17:22 +0800, Pan Xinhui wrote: >>> >>> Base code to enable qspinlock on powerpc. this patch add some >>> #ifdef >>> here and there. Although there is no pa...

On 2016?06?03? 09:32, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > On Fri, 2016-06-03 at 11:32 +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: >> On Thu, 2016-06-02 at 17:22 +0800, Pan Xinhui wrote: >>> >>> Base code to enable qspinlock on powerpc. this patch add some >>> #ifdef >>> here and there. Although there is no pa...

On Sun, 2014-09-21 at 15:03 +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > The exception I mentioned is that I would really like the virtio device > to expose via whatever transport we chose to use (though capability > exchange sounds like a reasonable one) whether the "server" > implementation is bypassing IOMMUs or not instead on relying...

On Sun, 2014-09-21 at 15:03 +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > The exception I mentioned is that I would really like the virtio device > to expose via whatever transport we chose to use (though capability > exchange sounds like a reasonable one) whether the "server" > implementation is bypassing IOMMUs or not instead on relying...

On Wed, 2018-06-13 at 22:25 +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > On Wed, 2018-06-13 at 00:41 -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 11, 2018 at 01:29:18PM +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > > > At the risk of repeating myself, let's just do the first pass which is > > > to switch virtio over to always using th...

On Wed, 2018-06-13 at 22:25 +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > On Wed, 2018-06-13 at 00:41 -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 11, 2018 at 01:29:18PM +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > > > At the risk of repeating myself, let's just do the first pass which is > > > to switch virtio over to always using th...

On Mon, Jun 11, 2018 at 01:29:18PM +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > At the risk of repeating myself, let's just do the first pass which is > to switch virtio over to always using the DMA API in the actual data > flow code, with a hook at initialization time that replaces the DMA ops > with some home cooked "direct" ops in the case...

On Mon, Jun 11, 2018 at 01:29:18PM +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > At the risk of repeating myself, let's just do the first pass which is > to switch virtio over to always using the DMA API in the actual data > flow code, with a hook at initialization time that replaces the DMA ops > with some home cooked "direct" ops in the case...

On Wed, 2014-09-24 at 14:41 -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > On Sat, Sep 20, 2014 at 10:05 PM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt > <benh at kernel.crashing.org> wrote: > > On Sun, 2014-09-21 at 15:03 +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > > > >> The exception I mentioned is that I would really like the virtio device > >> to expose via whatever transport we chose to use (though capabilit...

On Wed, 2014-09-24 at 14:41 -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > On Sat, Sep 20, 2014 at 10:05 PM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt > <benh at kernel.crashing.org> wrote: > > On Sun, 2014-09-21 at 15:03 +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > > > >> The exception I mentioned is that I would really like the virtio device > >> to expose via whatever transport we chose to use (though capabilit...

On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 05:36:53PM +0900, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > On Wed, 2015-10-28 at 16:40 +0900, Christian Borntraeger wrote: > > We have discussed that at kernel summit. I will try to implement a dummy dma_ops for > > s390 that does 1:1 mapping and Ben will look into doing some quirk to handle "old" > > code in additio...

On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 05:36:53PM +0900, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > On Wed, 2015-10-28 at 16:40 +0900, Christian Borntraeger wrote: > > We have discussed that at kernel summit. I will try to implement a dummy dma_ops for > > s390 that does 1:1 mapping and Ben will look into doing some quirk to handle "old" > > code in additio...

On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 2:50 PM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh at kernel.crashing.org> wrote: > On Wed, 2014-09-24 at 14:41 -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote: >> On Sat, Sep 20, 2014 at 10:05 PM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt >> <benh at kernel.crashing.org> wrote: >> > On Sun, 2014-09-21 at 15:03 +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wro...

On Tue, 2018-08-07 at 00:46 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Tue, Aug 07, 2018 at 07:26:35AM +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > > On Mon, 2018-08-06 at 23:35 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > > As I said replying to Christoph, we are "leaking" into the interface > > > > something here that is really what's the VM is doing to itself, which > > > > is to st...

On Tue, 2018-08-07 at 00:46 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Tue, Aug 07, 2018 at 07:26:35AM +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > > On Mon, 2018-08-06 at 23:35 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > > As I said replying to Christoph, we are "leaking" into the interface > > > > something here that is really what's the VM is doing to itself, which > > > > is to st...

On Fri, Jun 03, 2016 at 02:33:47PM +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > ?- For the above, can you show (or describe) where the qspinlock > ? ?improves things compared to our current locks. So currently PPC has a fairly straight forward test-and-set spinlock IIRC. You have this because LPAR/virt muck and lock holder preemption issues etc.. qspinlock is...

On Fri, Jun 03, 2016 at 02:33:47PM +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > ?- For the above, can you show (or describe) where the qspinlock > ? ?improves things compared to our current locks. So currently PPC has a fairly straight forward test-and-set spinlock IIRC. You have this because LPAR/virt muck and lock holder preemption issues etc.. qspinlock is...

On 04/06/2018 02:48 AM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > On Thu, 2018-04-05 at 21:34 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: >>> In this specific case, because that would make qemu expect an iommu, >>> and there isn't one. >> >> >> I think that you can set iommu_platform in qemu without an iommu. > > No...

On 04/06/2018 02:48 AM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > On Thu, 2018-04-05 at 21:34 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: >>> In this specific case, because that would make qemu expect an iommu, >>> and there isn't one. >> >> >> I think that you can set iommu_platform in qemu without an iommu. > > No...

On 08/05/2018 05:54 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Fri, Aug 03, 2018 at 08:21:26PM -0500, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: >> On Fri, 2018-08-03 at 22:08 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: >>>>>> Please go through these patches and review whether this approach broadly >>>>>> makes sense. I will appreciate suggestions, inputs, comments regarding >>>>>> the...