similar to: [PATCHv2] tracing/events: Add bounce tracing to swiotbl

Ftrace is currently not able to detect when SWIOTLB has to do double buffering under Xen. You can only see it indirectly in function_graph, when xen_swiotlb_map_page() doesn't stop after range_straddles_page_boundary(), but calls spinlock functions, memcpy() and xen_phys_to_bus() as well. This patch introduces the swiotlb-xen:bounced event, which also prints out the following informations to

Ftrace is currently not able to detect when SWIOTLB has to do double buffering under Xen. You can only see it indirectly in function_graph, when xen_swiotlb_map_page() doesn't stop after range_straddles_page_boundary(), but calls spinlock functions, memcpy() and xen_phys_to_bus() as well. This patch introduces the swiotlb-xen:bounced event, which also prints out the following informations to

Ftrace is currently not able to detect when SWIOTLB has to do double buffering under Xen. You can only see it indirectly in function_graph, when xen_swiotlb_map_page() doesn't stop after range_straddles_page_boundary(), but calls spinlock functions, memcpy() and xen_phys_to_bus() as well. This patch introduces the swiotlb-xen:bounced event, which also prints out the following informations to

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. > >

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. > >

Hi all, this patch series enables xen-swiotlb on arm and arm64. It has been heavily reworked compared to the previous versions in order to achieve better performances and to address review comments. We are not using dma_mark_clean to ensure coherency anymore. We call the platform implementation of map_page and unmap_page. We assume that dom0 has been mapped 1:1 (physical address == machine

This patch fixes Linux 2.6.18 compilation on x86-64 and also works on i386. Signed-off-by: Stefan Berger <stefanb@us.ibm.com> _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel

Hi Alasdair, This is dm-ioband v1.12.3 release that is a minor update to avoid sparse warnings other than related to the event tracing. (I used sparse-2009-07-29.) This patch can be applied to the current dm-devel tree and 2.6.31-rc4, so could you please replace dm-add-ioband.patch in your tree with this? And I would appreciate it if you would let me know your thoughts about merging dm-ioband to

Hi Alasdair, This is dm-ioband v1.12.3 release that is a minor update to avoid sparse warnings other than related to the event tracing. (I used sparse-2009-07-29.) This patch can be applied to the current dm-devel tree and 2.6.31-rc4, so could you please replace dm-add-ioband.patch in your tree with this? And I would appreciate it if you would let me know your thoughts about merging dm-ioband to

Hi Alasdair, This is dm-ioband v1.12.3 release that is a minor update to avoid sparse warnings other than related to the event tracing. (I used sparse-2009-07-29.) This patch can be applied to the current dm-devel tree and 2.6.31-rc4, so could you please replace dm-add-ioband.patch in your tree with this? And I would appreciate it if you would let me know your thoughts about merging dm-ioband to

Hi Alasdair, This is dm-ioband v1.12.2 release that is a minor update to fit the current dm-devel tree. Could you please replace dm-add-ioband.patch in your tree with this patch? And I would appreciate it if you would let me know your thoughts about merging dm-ioband to upstream. Thanks, Ryo Tsuruta About dm-ioband: dm-ioband is an I/O bandwidth controller implemented as a device-mapper

Hi Alasdair, This is dm-ioband v1.12.2 release that is a minor update to fit the current dm-devel tree. Could you please replace dm-add-ioband.patch in your tree with this patch? And I would appreciate it if you would let me know your thoughts about merging dm-ioband to upstream. Thanks, Ryo Tsuruta About dm-ioband: dm-ioband is an I/O bandwidth controller implemented as a device-mapper

Hi Alasdair, This is dm-ioband v1.12.2 release that is a minor update to fit the current dm-devel tree. Could you please replace dm-add-ioband.patch in your tree with this patch? And I would appreciate it if you would let me know your thoughts about merging dm-ioband to upstream. Thanks, Ryo Tsuruta About dm-ioband: dm-ioband is an I/O bandwidth controller implemented as a device-mapper

On x86 set_pte_at() is now always falling back to set_pte(). So instead of having this fallback after the paravirt maze just drop the set_pte_at paravirt operation and let set_pte_at() use the set_pte() function directly. Signed-off-by: Juergen Gross <jgross at suse.com> --- arch/x86/include/asm/paravirt.h | 8 +------- arch/x86/include/asm/paravirt_types.h | 2 --

Split out subsystem specific changes for easier reviews. This will be squashed with main commit. Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski at samsung.com> --- drivers/xen/swiotlb-xen.c | 14 +++++++------- include/xen/swiotlb-xen.h | 12 ++++++------ 2 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/xen/swiotlb-xen.c b/drivers/xen/swiotlb-xen.c index

Hi Konrad, The following patch causes fairly large packet loss when transmitting from dom0 to the physical network, at least with my tg3 hardware, but I assume it can impact anything which uses this interface. I suspect that the issue is that the compound pages allocated in this way are not backed by contiguous mfns and so things fall apart when the driver tries to do DMA. However I

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

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 +++

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> ---

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> ---