similar to: [PATCH 0 of 13] Basic infrastructure patches for a paravirtualized kernel

Hi Andrew, This series of patches lays the basic ground work for the paravirtualized kernel patches coming later on. I think this lot is ready for the rough-and-tumble world of the -mm tree. The main change from the last posting is that all the page-table related patches have been moved out, and will be posted separately. Also, the off-by-one in reserving the top of address space has been

Hi Andrew, This series of patches lays the basic ground work for the paravirtualized kernel patches coming later on. I think this lot is ready for the rough-and-tumble world of the -mm tree. The main change from the last posting is that all the page-table related patches have been moved out, and will be posted separately. Also, the off-by-one in reserving the top of address space has been

I''m sure everyone has seen the drop of VMI patches for Linux at this point, but just in case, the link is included below. I''ve read this version of the VMI spec and have made my way through most of the patches. While I wasn''t really that impressed with the first spec wrt Xen, the second version seems to be much more palatable. Specifically, the code inlining and

Hi Andi, Here's a repost of the paravirt_ops update series I posted the other day. Since then, I found a few potential bugs with patching clobbering, cleaned up and documented paravirt.h and the patching machinery. Overview: add-MAINTAINERS.patch obvious remove-CONFIG_DEBUG_PARAVIRT.patch No longer meaningful or needed. paravirt-nop.patch Clean up nop paravirt_ops functions, mainly to

Hi Andi, Here's a repost of the paravirt_ops update series I posted the other day. Since then, I found a few potential bugs with patching clobbering, cleaned up and documented paravirt.h and the patching machinery. Overview: add-MAINTAINERS.patch obvious remove-CONFIG_DEBUG_PARAVIRT.patch No longer meaningful or needed. paravirt-nop.patch Clean up nop paravirt_ops functions, mainly to

Chris Wright wrote: >* Zachary Amsden (zach@vmware.com) wrote: > > >>Does Xen assume page aligned descriptor tables? I assume from this >> >> > >Yes. > > > >>patch and snippets I have gathered from others, that is a yes, and other >>things here imply that DT pages are not shadowed. If so, Xen itself >>must have live segments

Chris Wright wrote: >* Zachary Amsden (zach@vmware.com) wrote: > > >>Does Xen assume page aligned descriptor tables? I assume from this >> >> > >Yes. > > > >>patch and snippets I have gathered from others, that is a yes, and other >>things here imply that DT pages are not shadowed. If so, Xen itself >>must have live segments

This series adds support for transparent huge page migration to migrate_vma_*() and adds nouveau SVM and HMM selftests as consumers. An earlier version was posted previously [1]. This version now supports splitting a THP midway in the migration process which led to a number of changes. The patches apply cleanly to the current linux-mm tree. Since there are a couple of patches in linux-mm from Dan

Hi Andi, This series of patches updates paravirt_ops in various ways. Some of the changes are plain cleanups and improvements, and some add some interfaces necessary for Xen. The brief overview: add-MAINTAINERS.patch - obvious remove-CONFIG_DEBUG_PARAVIRT.patch - no longer needed paravirt-nop.patch - mark nop operations consistently paravirt-pte-accessors.patch - operations to pack/unpack

Hi Andi, This series of patches updates paravirt_ops in various ways. Some of the changes are plain cleanups and improvements, and some add some interfaces necessary for Xen. The brief overview: add-MAINTAINERS.patch - obvious remove-CONFIG_DEBUG_PARAVIRT.patch - no longer needed paravirt-nop.patch - mark nop operations consistently paravirt-pte-accessors.patch - operations to pack/unpack

These patches apply to linux-5.8.0-rc1. Patches 1-3 should probably go into 5.8, the others can be queued for 5.9. Patches 4-6 improve the HMM self tests. Patch 7-8 prepare nouveau for the meat of this series which adds support and testing for compound page mapping of system memory (patches 9-11) and compound page migration to device private memory (patches 12-16). Since these changes are split

The long term plan has been to replace Xen PV guests by PVH. The first victim of that plan are now 32-bit PV guests, as those are used only rather seldom these days. Xen on x86 requires 64-bit support and with Grub2 now supporting PVH officially since version 2.04 there is no need to keep 32-bit PV guest support alive in the Linux kernel. Additionally Meltdown mitigation is not available in the

The long term plan has been to replace Xen PV guests by PVH. The first victim of that plan are now 32-bit PV guests, as those are used only rather seldom these days. Xen on x86 requires 64-bit support and with Grub2 now supporting PVH officially since version 2.04 there is no need to keep 32-bit PV guest support alive in the Linux kernel. Additionally Meltdown mitigation is not available in the

A lot of cleanup after removal of 32-bit Xen PV guest support in paravirt code. Changes in V4: - dropped patches 1-3, as already committed - addressed comments to V3 - added new patches 5+6 Changes in V3: - addressed comments to V2 - split patch 1 into 2 patches - new patches 3 and 7 Changes in V2: - rebase to 5.8 kernel - addressed comments to V1 - new patches 3 and 4 Juergen Gross (6):

The long term plan has been to replace Xen PV guests by PVH. The first victim of that plan are now 32-bit PV guests, as those are used only rather seldom these days. Xen on x86 requires 64-bit support and with Grub2 now supporting PVH officially since version 2.04 there is no need to keep 32-bit PV guest support alive in the Linux kernel. Additionally Meltdown mitigation is not available in the

At OLS I gave a talk on some of the Xen scalability inhibitors, and one of these was writable page tables. We went over why the feature does not scale, but just as important, we found that the uniprocessor case does not provide any advantage either. These tests were done on x86_64, so I wanted to run the 1-way test on 32 bit to show the same problem. So, I have run with writable PTs and

The ptep_establish macro is only used on user-level PTEs, for P->P mapping changes. Since these always happen under protection of the pagetable lock, the strong synchronization of a 64-bit cmpxchg is not needed, in fact, not even a lock prefix needs to be used. We can simply instead clear the P-bit, followed by a normal set. The write ordering is still important to avoid the possibility of

Hi Linus, Here's a set of patches to update paravirt_ops and Xen for 2.6.24 A quick overview of the patchset: paravirt_ops: Remove the monolithic paravirt_ops structure, and replace it with smaller structures of related functions. Also, clean up the handling of lazy mode to make it easier to implement. x86/mm/init.c: remove a chunk of dead code Xen: - remove duplicate includes -

Hi Linus, Here's a set of patches to update paravirt_ops and Xen for 2.6.24 A quick overview of the patchset: paravirt_ops: Remove the monolithic paravirt_ops structure, and replace it with smaller structures of related functions. Also, clean up the handling of lazy mode to make it easier to implement. x86/mm/init.c: remove a chunk of dead code Xen: - remove duplicate includes -

Hi Linus, Here's a set of patches to update paravirt_ops and Xen for 2.6.24 A quick overview of the patchset: paravirt_ops: Remove the monolithic paravirt_ops structure, and replace it with smaller structures of related functions. Also, clean up the handling of lazy mode to make it easier to implement. x86/mm/init.c: remove a chunk of dead code Xen: - remove duplicate includes -