similar to: [PATCH v7 09/19] virtio: stop using legacy struct vring in kernel

struct vring (in the uapi directory) and supporting APIs are kept around to solely avoid breaking old userspace builds. It's not actually part of the UAPI - it was kept in the UAPI header by mistake, and using it in kernel isn't necessary and prevents us from making changes safely. In particular, the APIs actually assume the legacy layout. Add an internal kernel-only struct vring and

struct vring (in the uapi directory) and supporting APIs are kept around to solely avoid breaking old userspace builds. It's not actually part of the UAPI - it was kept in the UAPI header by mistake, and using it in kernel isn't necessary and prevents us from making changes safely. In particular, the APIs actually assume the legacy layout. Add an internal kernel-only struct vring and

struct vring (in the uapi directory) and supporting APIs are kept around to solely avoid breaking old userspace builds. It's not actually part of the UAPI - it was kept in the UAPI header by mistake, and using it in kernel isn't necessary and prevents us from making changes safely. In particular, the APIs actually assume the legacy layout. Add an internal kernel-only struct vring and

struct vring (in the uapi directory) and supporting APIs are kept around to solely avoid breaking old userspace builds. It's not actually part of the UAPI - it was kept in the UAPI header by mistake, and using it in kernel isn't necessary and prevents us from making changes safely. In particular, the APIs actually assume the legacy layout. Add an internal kernel-only struct vring and

struct vring (in the uapi directory) and supporting APIs are kept around to solely avoid breaking old userspace builds. It's not actually part of the UAPI - it was kept in the UAPI header by mistake, and using it in kernel isn't necessary and prevents us from making changes safely. In particular, the APIs actually assume the legacy layout. Add an internal kernel-only struct vring and

struct vring (in the uapi directory) and supporting APIs are kept around to avoid breaking old userspace builds. It's not actually part of the UAPI - it was kept in the UAPI header by mistake, and using it in kernel isn't necessary and prevents us from making changes safely. In particular, the APIs actually assume the legacy layout. Add struct vring_s (identical ATM) and supporting legacy

struct vring (in the uapi directory) and supporting APIs are kept around to avoid breaking old userspace builds. It's not actually part of the UAPI - it was kept in the UAPI header by mistake, and using it in kernel isn't necessary and prevents us from making changes safely. In particular, the APIs actually assume the legacy layout. Add struct vring_s (identical ATM) and supporting legacy

struct vring (in the uapi directory) and supporting APIs are kept around to solely avoid breaking old userspace builds. It's not actually part of the UAPI - it was kept in the UAPI header by mistake, and using it in kernel isn't necessary and prevents us from making changes safely. In particular, the APIs actually assume the legacy layout. Add an internal kernel-only struct vring, add

The ring element addresses are passed between components with different alignments assumptions. Thus, if guest/userspace selects a pointer and host then gets and dereferences it, we might need to decrease the compiler-selected alignment to prevent compiler on the host from assuming pointer is aligned. This actually triggers on ARM with -mabi=apcs-gnu - which is a deprecated configuration, but it

On 2020/4/21 ??4:46, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > The ring element addresses are passed between components with different > alignments assumptions. Thus, if guest/userspace selects a pointer and > host then gets and dereferences it, we might need to decrease the > compiler-selected alignment to prevent compiler on the host from > assuming pointer is aligned. > > This actually

On 2020/4/22 ??10:58, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > The ring element addresses are passed between components with different > alignments assumptions. Thus, if guest/userspace selects a pointer and > host then gets and dereferences it, we might need to decrease the > compiler-selected alignment to prevent compiler on the host from > assuming pointer is aligned. > > This actually

The ring element addresses are passed between components with different alignments assumptions. Thus, if guest/userspace selects a pointer and host then gets and dereferences it, we might need to decrease the compiler-selected alignment to prevent compiler on the host from assuming pointer is aligned. This actually triggers on ARM with -mabi=apcs-gnu - which is a deprecated configuration, but it

The ring element addresses are passed between components with different alignments assumptions. Thus, if guest/userspace selects a pointer and host then gets and dereferences it, we might need to decrease the compiler-selected alignment to prevent compiler on the host from assuming pointer is aligned. This actually triggers on ARM with -mabi=apcs-gnu - which is a deprecated configuration, but it

The ring element addresses are passed between components with different alignments assumptions. Thus, if guest/userspace selects a pointer and host then gets and dereferences it, we might need to decrease the compiler-selected alignment to prevent compiler on the host from assuming pointer is aligned. This actually triggers on ARM with -mabi=apcs-gnu - which is a deprecated configuration, but it

The ring element addresses are passed between components with different alignments assumptions. Thus, if guest/userspace selects a pointer and host then gets and dereferences it, we might need to decrease the compiler-selected alignment to prevent compiler on the host from assuming pointer is aligned. This actually triggers on ARM with -mabi=apcs-gnu - which is a deprecated configuration, but it

On Tue, Mar 21, 2023 at 11:43?PM Stefano Garzarella <sgarzare at redhat.com> wrote: > > vDPA supports the possibility to use user VA in the iotlb messages. > So, let's add support for user VA in vringh to use it in the vDPA > simulators. > > Signed-off-by: Stefano Garzarella <sgarzare at redhat.com> > --- > > Notes: > v3: > - refactored

vDPA supports the possibility to use user VA in the iotlb messages. So, let's add support for user VA in vringh to use it in the vDPA simulators. Signed-off-by: Stefano Garzarella <sgarzare at redhat.com> --- Notes: v3: - refactored avoiding code duplication [Eugenio] v2: - replace kmap_atomic() with kmap_local_page() [see previous patch] - fix cast warnings when

On 2020/4/6 ??8:50, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > The ring element addresses are passed between components with different > alignments assumptions. Thus, if guest/userspace selects a pointer and > host then gets and dereferences it, we might need to decrease the > compiler-selected alignment to prevent compiler on the host from > assuming pointer is aligned. > > This actually

On 2020/4/6 ??9:55, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Mon, Apr 06, 2020 at 09:34:00PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: >> On 2020/4/6 ??8:50, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: >>> The ring element addresses are passed between components with different >>> alignments assumptions. Thus, if guest/userspace selects a pointer and >>> host then gets and dereferences it, we might need to

The ring element addresses are passed between components with different alignments assumptions. Thus, if guest/userspace selects a pointer and host then gets and dereferences it, we might need to decrease the compiler-selected alignment to prevent compiler on the host from assuming pointer is aligned. This actually triggers on ARM with -mabi=apcs-gnu - which is a deprecated configuration, but it