search for: qite

..., which calls the filter expression and possible jump to the body of the __except statement. Everything looks fine except that I need a reference to the filter expression in order to generate the EH tables. Is there a way to associate the filter expression with the landingpad instruction? I am qite sure that I miss here some LLVM API or idiom.... Regards Kai

...> expression and possible jump to the body of the __except statement. > > Everything looks fine except that I need a reference to the filter expression in > order to generate the EH tables. > Is there a way to associate the filter expression with the landingpad > instruction? I am qite sure that I miss here some LLVM API or idiom.... > > Regards > > Kai > > _______________________________________________ > LLVM Developers mailing list > LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev

...t of working for me. But I sense that you seem this method to be less then ideal. Reading through the virsh manual it looks like ... $ virsh snapshot-create [domain] --disk-only --live ... might be doing a similar thing. Maybe more elegant (pure virsh) and on a running machine what I can't qite figure out is where to squeeze in the name (or description, even) for the snapshot > On September 3, 2016 at 3:37 PM Martin Kletzander <mkletzan@redhat.com> wrote: > > On Sat, Sep 03, 2016 at 03:07:37PM +0800, vrms@netcologne.de wrote: > > > I take an internal snapshot (...

...sense that you seem this method to be less then ideal. > Reading through the virsh manual it looks like ... > > $ virsh snapshot-create [domain] --disk-only --live > > ... might be doing a similar thing. Maybe more elegant (pure virsh) and on a running machine > what I can't qite figure out is where to squeeze in the name (or description, even) for the snapshot > > > On September 3, 2016 at 3:37 PM Martin Kletzander <mkletzan@redhat.com> wrote: > > > > On Sat, Sep 03, 2016 at 03:07:37PM +0800, vrms@netcologne.de wrote: > > > > >...

I take an internal snapshot (VM is 'shutdown' when taking it) of a qcow2 image like this: $ qemu-img snapshot -c sn1 [my_image].qcow2 I see that snapshot when asking for: $ qemu-img info [my_image].qcow but do NOT see it with: $ virsh domblklist [my_domain] is that how it is meant to be?

...unk->end_addr - chunk->start_addr + 1; + + dma_free_coherent((struct device *) data, chunk_size, + (void *) chunk->start_addr, + (dma_addr_t) chunk->phys_addr); +} + +void cio_gp_dma_destroy(struct gen_pool *gp_dma, struct device *dma_dev) +{ + if (!gp_dma) + return; + /* this is qite ugly but no better idea */ + gen_pool_for_each_chunk(gp_dma, __gp_dma_free_dma, dma_dev); + gen_pool_destroy(gp_dma); +} + +static void __init cio_dma_pool_init(void) +{ + /* No need to free up the resources: compiled in */ + cio_dma_pool = cio_gp_dma_create(cio_get_dma_css_dev(), 1); +} + +void *c...

...struct gen_pool_chunk *chunk, void *data) +{ + dma_free_coherent((struct device *) data, PAGE_SIZE, + (void *) chunk->start_addr, + (dma_addr_t) chunk->phys_addr); +} + +void cio_gp_dma_destroy(struct gen_pool *gp_dma, struct device *dma_dev) +{ + if (!gp_dma) + return; + /* this is qite ugly but no better idea */ + gen_pool_for_each_chunk(gp_dma, __gp_dma_free_dma, dma_dev); + gen_pool_destroy(gp_dma); +} + +static void __init cio_dma_pool_init(void) +{ + /* No need to free up the resources: compiled in */ + cio_dma_pool = cio_gp_dma_create(cio_get_dma_css_dev(), 1); +} + +void *c...

...unk->end_addr - chunk->start_addr + 1; + + dma_free_coherent((struct device *) data, chunk_size, + (void *) chunk->start_addr, + (dma_addr_t) chunk->phys_addr); +} + +void cio_gp_dma_destroy(struct gen_pool *gp_dma, struct device *dma_dev) +{ + if (!gp_dma) + return; + /* this is qite ugly but no better idea */ + gen_pool_for_each_chunk(gp_dma, __gp_dma_free_dma, dma_dev); + gen_pool_destroy(gp_dma); +} + +static int cio_dma_pool_init(void) +{ + /* No need to free up the resources: compiled in */ + cio_dma_pool = cio_gp_dma_create(cio_get_dma_css_dev(), 1); + if (!cio_dma_pool)...

...unk->end_addr - chunk->start_addr + 1; + + dma_free_coherent((struct device *) data, chunk_size, + (void *) chunk->start_addr, + (dma_addr_t) chunk->phys_addr); +} + +void cio_gp_dma_destroy(struct gen_pool *gp_dma, struct device *dma_dev) +{ + if (!gp_dma) + return; + /* this is qite ugly but no better idea */ + gen_pool_for_each_chunk(gp_dma, __gp_dma_free_dma, dma_dev); + gen_pool_destroy(gp_dma); +} + +static int cio_dma_pool_init(void) +{ + /* No need to free up the resources: compiled in */ + cio_dma_pool = cio_gp_dma_create(cio_get_dma_css_dev(), 1); + if (!cio_dma_pool)...

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

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

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

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

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

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