search for: high_memori

Displaying 20 results from an estimated 30 matches for "high_memori".

Did you mean: high_memory
2020 Jul 28
0
[vhost:vhost 38/45] include/linux/vdpa.h:43:21: error: expected ':', ',', ';', '}' or '__attribute__' before '.' token
tree: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mst/vhost.git vhost head: 84d40e4b4bc64456abf5ef5663871053b40e84ac commit: fee8fe6bd8ccacd27e963b71b4f943be3721779e [38/45] vdpa: make sure set_features in invoked for legacy config: m68k-randconfig-r022-20200727 (attached as .config) compiler: m68k-linux-gcc (GCC) 9.3.0 reproduce (this is a W=1 build): wget
2019 May 08
2
[PATCH 04/10] s390/mm: force swiotlb for protected virtualization
On Fri, 26 Apr 2019 20:32:39 +0200 Halil Pasic <pasic at linux.ibm.com> wrote: > On s390, protected virtualization guests have to use bounced I/O > buffers. That requires some plumbing. > > Let us make sure, any device that uses DMA API with direct ops > correctly is spared from the problems, that a hypervisor attempting > I/O to a non-shared page would bring. > >
2019 May 08
2
[PATCH 04/10] s390/mm: force swiotlb for protected virtualization
On Fri, 26 Apr 2019 20:32:39 +0200 Halil Pasic <pasic at linux.ibm.com> wrote: > On s390, protected virtualization guests have to use bounced I/O > buffers. That requires some plumbing. > > Let us make sure, any device that uses DMA API with direct ops > correctly is spared from the problems, that a hypervisor attempting > I/O to a non-shared page would bring. > >
2019 Apr 09
0
[RFC PATCH 03/12] s390/mm: force swiotlb for protected virtualization
On Fri, 5 Apr 2019 01:16:13 +0200 Halil Pasic <pasic at linux.ibm.com> wrote: > On s390 protected virtualization guests also have to use bounce I/O > buffers. That requires some plumbing. > > Let us make sure any device using DMA API accordingly is spared from the > problems that hypervisor attempting I/O to a non-shared secure page would > bring. I have problems
2007 Jul 06
0
Xen 3.03 - no DMA memory available
Hi, I am trying to install a broadcom ethernet controller into Dom0 (RHEL 5)...I have compiled the broadcom sources with Xen kernel sources... First, I have used the private pool in kernel memory mode, i.e. the module will try to assemble a physically contiguous of memory using the kernel page allocator. This memory block is then administered by the mpool allocation functions. Note that once a
2007 Apr 18
0
[PATCH 5/9] 00mm6 kpte flush.patch
Create a new PTE function which combines clearing a kernel PTE with the subsequent flush. This allows the two to be easily combined into a single hypercall or paravirt-op. More subtly, reverse the order of the flush for kmap_atomic. Instead of flushing on establishing a mapping, flush on clearing a mapping. This eliminates the possibility of leaving stale kmap entries which may still have
2019 Apr 26
0
[PATCH 04/10] s390/mm: force swiotlb for protected virtualization
On s390, protected virtualization guests have to use bounced I/O buffers. That requires some plumbing. Let us make sure, any device that uses DMA API with direct ops correctly is spared from the problems, that a hypervisor attempting I/O to a non-shared page would bring. Signed-off-by: Halil Pasic <pasic at linux.ibm.com> --- arch/s390/Kconfig | 4 +++
2019 Jun 06
0
[PATCH v4 1/8] s390/mm: force swiotlb for protected virtualization
On s390, protected virtualization guests have to use bounced I/O buffers. That requires some plumbing. Let us make sure, any device that uses DMA API with direct ops correctly is spared from the problems, that a hypervisor attempting I/O to a non-shared page would bring. Signed-off-by: Halil Pasic <pasic at linux.ibm.com> Reviewed-by: Claudio Imbrenda <imbrenda at linux.ibm.com> ---
2019 Jun 12
0
[PATCH v5 1/8] s390/mm: force swiotlb for protected virtualization
On s390, protected virtualization guests have to use bounced I/O buffers. That requires some plumbing. Let us make sure, any device that uses DMA API with direct ops correctly is spared from the problems, that a hypervisor attempting I/O to a non-shared page would bring. Signed-off-by: Halil Pasic <pasic at linux.ibm.com> Reviewed-by: Claudio Imbrenda <imbrenda at linux.ibm.com> ---
2019 May 23
0
[PATCH v2 1/8] s390/mm: force swiotlb for protected virtualization
From: Halil Pasic <pasic at linux.ibm.com> On s390, protected virtualization guests have to use bounced I/O buffers. That requires some plumbing. Let us make sure, any device that uses DMA API with direct ops correctly is spared from the problems, that a hypervisor attempting I/O to a non-shared page would bring. Signed-off-by: Halil Pasic <pasic at linux.ibm.com> Reviewed-by:
2019 May 29
0
[PATCH v3 1/8] s390/mm: force swiotlb for protected virtualization
From: Halil Pasic <pasic at linux.ibm.com> On s390, protected virtualization guests have to use bounced I/O buffers. That requires some plumbing. Let us make sure, any device that uses DMA API with direct ops correctly is spared from the problems, that a hypervisor attempting I/O to a non-shared page would bring. Signed-off-by: Halil Pasic <pasic at linux.ibm.com> Reviewed-by:
2019 Apr 09
0
[RFC PATCH 03/12] s390/mm: force swiotlb for protected virtualization
On Tue, 9 Apr 2019 12:54:16 +0200 Halil Pasic <pasic at linux.ibm.com> wrote: > On Tue, 9 Apr 2019 12:16:47 +0200 > Cornelia Huck <cohuck at redhat.com> wrote: > > > On Fri, 5 Apr 2019 01:16:13 +0200 > > Halil Pasic <pasic at linux.ibm.com> wrote: > > > > > On s390 protected virtualization guests also have to use bounce I/O > > >
2019 May 09
0
[PATCH 04/10] s390/mm: force swiotlb for protected virtualization
On Wed, 8 May 2019 15:15:40 +0200 Claudio Imbrenda <imbrenda at linux.ibm.com> wrote: > On Fri, 26 Apr 2019 20:32:39 +0200 > Halil Pasic <pasic at linux.ibm.com> wrote: > > > On s390, protected virtualization guests have to use bounced I/O > > buffers. That requires some plumbing. > > > > Let us make sure, any device that uses DMA API with direct
2019 May 09
0
[PATCH 04/10] s390/mm: force swiotlb for protected virtualization
> Subject: [PATCH 04/10] s390/mm: force swiotlb for protected virtualization > Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2019 20:32:39 +0200 > From: Halil Pasic <pasic at linux.ibm.com> > To: kvm at vger.kernel.org, linux-s390 at vger.kernel.org, Cornelia Huck <cohuck at redhat.com>, > Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky at de.ibm.com>, Sebastian Ott <sebott at linux.ibm.com> > CC:
2007 Apr 18
8
[patch 0/8] Basic infrastructure patches for a paravirtualized kernel
Hi Andrew, This series of patches lays the basic ground work for the paravirtualized kernel patches coming later on. I think this lot is ready for the rough-and-tumble world of the -mm tree. The main change from the last posting is that all the page-table related patches have been moved out, and will be posted separately. Also, the off-by-one in reserving the top of address space has been
2007 Apr 18
8
[patch 0/8] Basic infrastructure patches for a paravirtualized kernel
Hi Andrew, This series of patches lays the basic ground work for the paravirtualized kernel patches coming later on. I think this lot is ready for the rough-and-tumble world of the -mm tree. The main change from the last posting is that all the page-table related patches have been moved out, and will be posted separately. Also, the off-by-one in reserving the top of address space has been
2007 Apr 18
15
[PATCH 0 of 13] Basic infrastructure patches for a paravirtualized kernel
[ REPOST: Apologies to anyone who has seen this before. It didn't make it onto any of the lists it should have. -J ] Hi Andrew, This series of patches lays the basic ground work for the paravirtualized kernel patches coming later on. I think this lot is ready for the rough-and-tumble world of the -mm tree. For the most part, these patches do nothing or very little. The patches should
2007 Apr 18
15
[PATCH 0 of 13] Basic infrastructure patches for a paravirtualized kernel
[ REPOST: Apologies to anyone who has seen this before. It didn't make it onto any of the lists it should have. -J ] Hi Andrew, This series of patches lays the basic ground work for the paravirtualized kernel patches coming later on. I think this lot is ready for the rough-and-tumble world of the -mm tree. For the most part, these patches do nothing or very little. The patches should
2019 Apr 26
33
[PATCH 00/10] s390: virtio: support protected virtualization
Enhanced virtualization protection technology may require the use of bounce buffers for I/O. While support for this was built into the virtio core, virtio-ccw wasn't changed accordingly. Some background on technology (not part of this series) and the terminology used. * Protected Virtualization (PV): Protected Virtualization guarantees, that non-shared memory of a guest that operates in PV
2019 Apr 26
33
[PATCH 00/10] s390: virtio: support protected virtualization
Enhanced virtualization protection technology may require the use of bounce buffers for I/O. While support for this was built into the virtio core, virtio-ccw wasn't changed accordingly. Some background on technology (not part of this series) and the terminology used. * Protected Virtualization (PV): Protected Virtualization guarantees, that non-shared memory of a guest that operates in PV