similar to: [RFC PATCH 03/12] s390/mm: force swiotlb for protected virtualization

Displaying 20 results from an estimated 1000 matches similar to: "[RFC PATCH 03/12] s390/mm: force swiotlb for protected virtualization"

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 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 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:
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 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 26
2
[PATCH 04/10] s390/mm: force swiotlb for protected virtualization
On Fri, Apr 26, 2019 at 08:32:39PM +0200, Halil Pasic wrote: > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(set_memory_encrypted); > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(set_memory_decrypted); > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(sev_active); Why do you export these? I know x86 exports those as well, but it shoudn't be needed there either.
2019 Apr 26
2
[PATCH 04/10] s390/mm: force swiotlb for protected virtualization
On Fri, Apr 26, 2019 at 08:32:39PM +0200, Halil Pasic wrote: > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(set_memory_encrypted); > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(set_memory_decrypted); > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(sev_active); Why do you export these? I know x86 exports those as well, but it shoudn't be needed there either.
2019 Apr 29
1
[PATCH 04/10] s390/mm: force swiotlb for protected virtualization
On 29.04.19 15:59, Halil Pasic wrote: > On Fri, 26 Apr 2019 12:27:11 -0700 > Christoph Hellwig <hch at infradead.org> wrote: > >> On Fri, Apr 26, 2019 at 08:32:39PM +0200, Halil Pasic wrote: >>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(set_memory_encrypted); >> >>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(set_memory_decrypted); >> >>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(sev_active); >>
2019 Apr 29
0
[PATCH 04/10] s390/mm: force swiotlb for protected virtualization
On Fri, 26 Apr 2019 12:27:11 -0700 Christoph Hellwig <hch at infradead.org> wrote: > On Fri, Apr 26, 2019 at 08:32:39PM +0200, Halil Pasic wrote: > > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(set_memory_encrypted); > > > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(set_memory_decrypted); > > > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(sev_active); > > Why do you export these? I know x86 exports those as well, but > it
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
2019 Jun 06
15
[PATCH v4 0/8] 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 Jun 06
15
[PATCH v4 0/8] 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 May 29
16
[PATCH v3 0/8] 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 May 23
18
[PATCH v2 0/8] 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