similar to: [Qemu-devel] SCSI Command support over VirtIO Block device

Hi I am trying to implement VirtIO support for a proprietary OS. And It would be great if I am able to process SCSI commands over VirtIO Block device. I tried to execute INQUIRY command but the status returned is UNSUPPORTED. If anyone provide example VirtIO SCSI Command request structure for INQUIRY command as per VirtIO spec Appendix D would be a great help. And also, the paragraph from

Hi I am trying to implement VirtIO support for a proprietary OS. And It would be great if I am able to process SCSI commands over VirtIO Block device. I tried to execute INQUIRY command but the status returned is UNSUPPORTED. If anyone provide example VirtIO SCSI Command request structure for INQUIRY command as per VirtIO spec Appendix D would be a great help. And also, the paragraph from

Hi All I am interested in developing a custom PCI device for qemu. For learning purpose, It could be just a very basic device e.g. a device which just loopbacks the contents from device memory to some system buffer. Please guide me how such a device can be developed in qemu. Do qemu have some device model or device framework for developing custom virtual devices? Any documentation and samples

Hi All I am interested in developing a custom PCI device for qemu. For learning purpose, It could be just a very basic device e.g. a device which just loopbacks the contents from device memory to some system buffer. Please guide me how such a device can be developed in qemu. Do qemu have some device model or device framework for developing custom virtual devices? Any documentation and samples

This implements a virtio simulator: - adds stubs for enough support functions to compile virtio ring in userspace. - Adds a stub vhost based module this can talk to. This should help us decide things like which ring layout works best. Communication is currently done using an eventfd descriptor. This means there's a shared spinlock there: what I would like to do in the future, is run this

This implements a virtio simulator: - adds stubs for enough support functions to compile virtio ring in userspace. - Adds a stub vhost based module this can talk to. This should help us decide things like which ring layout works best. Communication is currently done using an eventfd descriptor. This means there's a shared spinlock there: what I would like to do in the future, is run this

The new @llvm.memcpy API does not have an alignment parameter. Instead the docs say to use the align <n> attribute. How is this supposed to work with different alignments? For example, I have one memcpy with align 4, align 4, and another with align 1, align 1. ; Function Attrs: argmemonly nounwind declare void @llvm.memcpy.p0i8.p0i8.i64(i8* nocapture writeonly align 4, i8* nocapture

On 03/21/2016 08:54 AM, Nicolai Hähnle wrote: > On 19.03.2016 14:47, Philip Reames wrote: >> I'm generally in support of this change. I haven't looked at the patch >> yet, but the direction seems worthwhile. >> >> Note that we already have a writeonly predicate in a few places in the >> code (BasicAA being one). If we do introduce the new intrinsic

On 3/22/2018 3:15 PM, Andrew Kelley via llvm-dev wrote: > The new @llvm.memcpy API does not have an alignment parameter. Instead > the docs say to use the align <n> attribute. How is this supposed to > work with different alignments? > > For example, I have one memcpy with align 4, align 4, and another with > align 1, align 1. > > ; Function Attrs: argmemonly

Hi all, Let's see an example (from Alexandre Isoard) first: **************************************************************************************** ; RUN: opt -ipsccp -deadargelim -licm -O2 -S < %s @g = internal global i32 0 ; Function Attrs: argmemonly define internal void @foo(i32* nonnull dereferenceable(4) %arg, i32 %val) #0 { entry: store i32 %val, i32* %arg ret void } define

Thank you Hal and Stefan! Bug report is filed: https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=46717 And Stefan, I think 'attributor' is a really nice pass, and can infer more precise and useful attributes, which may give more opportunities for optimization. But we shouldn't depend on 'attributor' to correct wrong function attributes, because we cannot run 'attributor' after

What''s the best way to exclude ActiveRecord in Rails3? In Rails2, one could just do: *config.frameworks -= [ :active_record ]* in the configuration block in environment.rb. Is it possible in Rails3? Thanks. Anuj -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to

The frontend code is a pretty simple for loop, that counts from i = 0; i != 10; i += 1 It gets optimized into and endless loop. export fn entry() void { var array: [10]Bar = undefined; var x = for (array) |elem, i| { if (i == 1) break elem; } else bar2(); } Here's the generated IR: ; ModuleID = 'test' source_filename = "test" target datalayout =

On 19.03.2016 14:47, Philip Reames wrote: > I'm generally in support of this change. I haven't looked at the patch > yet, but the direction seems worthwhile. > > Note that we already have a writeonly predicate in a few places in the > code (BasicAA being one). If we do introduce the new intrinsic > property, we should refactor all of these places to use the new >

Hi all, this series builds on my previous changes in Jens' for-4.11/rq-refactor branch that split out the BLOCK_PC fields from struct request into a new struct scsi_request, and makes support for struct scsi_request and the SCSI passthrough ioctls optional. It is now only enabled by drivers that need it. In addition I've made SCSI passthrough support in the virtio_blk driver an optional

Hi all, this series builds on my previous changes in Jens' for-4.11/rq-refactor branch that split out the BLOCK_PC fields from struct request into a new struct scsi_request, and makes support for struct scsi_request and the SCSI passthrough ioctls optional. It is now only enabled by drivers that need it. In addition I've made SCSI passthrough support in the virtio_blk driver an optional

I took a stub at documenting CMD and FLUSH request types in virtio block. Christoph, could you look over this please? I note that the interface seems full of warts to me, this might be a first step to cleaning them. One issue I struggled with especially is how type field mixes bits and non-bit values. I ended up simply defining all legal values, so that we have CMD = 2, CMD_OUT = 3 and so on.

I took a stub at documenting CMD and FLUSH request types in virtio block. Christoph, could you look over this please? I note that the interface seems full of warts to me, this might be a first step to cleaning them. One issue I struggled with especially is how type field mixes bits and non-bit values. I ended up simply defining all legal values, so that we have CMD = 2, CMD_OUT = 3 and so on.

On 7/14/20 4:34 PM, Hal Finkel via llvm-dev wrote: > > On 7/14/20 11:28 AM, Fangqing Du wrote: >> Thank you Hal and Stefan! >> >> Bug report is filed: https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=46717 >> <https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=46717> >> >> And Stefan, >> I think 'attributor' is a really nice pass, and can infer more >>

Hey, We hit a bug today because Arel::Visitors::ToSql is not threadsafe. Here is what is happening: Arel::Visitors::ENGINE_VISITORS is a cache of visitors instances. These instances are not inherently threadsafe because it contains state ''@last_column'', ''@connection'' that is shared between threads. The other variables ''@pool'',