Displaying 20 results from an estimated 400 matches similar to: "Re: [Xen-ia64-devel] Weekly benchmark results [ww24]"
2007 Oct 16
0
[PATCH][IOEMU] Fix to Allow blktap to be able to be booted as system volume for PV-on-HVM.
Hi All,
I sent the patch to allow blktap to be able to booted as system bolume for
PV-on-HVM.
However, there was a problem that hdN and xvdN were not able to be specified at
the same time.
I made the patch to correct it as follows.
- Whether hdN is defined first is checked.
- If hdN is defined, xvdN is not replaced with hdN.
Signed-off-by: Takanori Kasai <kasai.takanori@jp.fujitsu.com>
2024 Jun 07
0
[RFC PATCH 7/8] rust: add firmware abstractions
On Fri, Jun 07, 2024 at 09:11:32PM +0900, FUJITA Tomonori wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, 31 May 2024 11:59:47 +0200
> Danilo Krummrich <dakr at redhat.com> wrote:
>
> > Once we get to a conclusion I can send a series with only the device and firmare
> > abstractions such that we can get them in outside of the scope of the reset of
> > both series to get your
2006 Sep 12
1
RE: 32E (64bit) VMX keyboard is out of control, ifgiven an addition ''hde''
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Jan Beulich [mailto:jbeulich@novell.com]
>Sent: 2006年9月12日 18:05
>To: You, Yongkang
>Cc: xen-devel
>Subject: RE: [Xen-devel] 32E (64bit) VMX keyboard is out of control,ifgiven an
>addition ''hde''
>
>
>Not sure what RC3 is, but the other two are Linux-es: Can you try rebuilding
>the guest kernels with attached
2006 Sep 12
2
RE: 32E (64bit) VMX keyboard is out of control, ifgiven an addition ''hde''
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Jan Beulich [mailto:jbeulich@novell.com]
>Sent: 2006年9月12日 17:06
>To: You, Yongkang
>Cc: xen-devel
>Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] 32E (64bit) VMX keyboard is out of control, ifgiven an
>addition ''hde''
>
>>After creating VMX, its keyboard can not be used properly. For example, if
>pressing
2006 Aug 02
2
[PATCH 1/6] scsifront/back drivers'' common Makefile and header
# HG changeset patch
# User fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp
# Node ID 7111077b493ea53ef055ce38098f8af67f87d749
# Parent ed8d345449c176cb5fe0ccff4299da782eb63c08
SCSI frontend and backend drivers'' common Makefile and header
Signed-off-by: FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp>
diff -r ed8d345449c1 -r 7111077b493e buildconfigs/linux-defconfig_xen0_x86_32
---
2024 May 30
0
[RFC PATCH 7/8] rust: add firmware abstractions
On Thu, May 30, 2024 at 08:28:24AM +0900, FUJITA Tomonori wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, 29 May 2024 21:57:03 +0200
> Greg KH <gregkh at linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> >> For a Rust PHY driver, you know that you have a valid pointer to C's
> >> device object of C's PHY device during the probe callback. The driver
> >> creates a Rust device
2005 Dec 04
0
[PATCH] Seperate VMX domainname argument to 2 parts to enable qemu-dm
Image.py should send 2 new arguments to qemu-dm for setting QEMU window
Title. 1 is const string "-domain-name", the other is the string of
domain name. At present imagy.py combines these two strings to 1. So
Qemu will fail to recognize it and fail to start.
Signed-off-by: Yongkang You <yongkang.you@intel.com>
--- a/tools/python/xen/xend/image.py 2005-12-04 14:32:04.956602836
2007 Apr 24
0
[PATCH] Add monitor arg in configure_hvm() of create.py.
Fix an arg. definition missing for "monitor" in last monitor enabling
patch, which would cause "monitor" enabling failed.
Signed-off-by: Yongkang You <yongkang.you@intel.com>
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
2006 Sep 12
0
RE: 32E (64bit) VMX keyboard is out of control, ifgiven an addition ''hde''
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Ian Pratt [mailto:m+Ian.Pratt@cl.cam.ac.uk]
>Sent: 2006年9月12日 18:02
>To: You, Yongkang; Jan Beulich
>Cc: xen-devel; ian.pratt@cl.cam.ac.uk
>Subject: RE: [Xen-devel] 32E (64bit) VMX keyboard is out of control,ifgiven an
>addition ''hde''
>
>Do you mean that with a plain 32b or 32b PAE hypervisor the problem
2009 Jan 08
0
[LLVMdev] Loop elimination with floating point counter.
It's because with 1.0f, the loop index is simplified into an integer.
With 1.2f, it isn't. The loop deletion pass is dependent on the loop
analyses being able to determine that the loop is finite, which they
don't attempt to do for loops with floating point indices. Attempting
to do so would require additional reasoning about floating point
precision issues.
--Owen
On
2024 May 30
0
[RFC PATCH 7/8] rust: add firmware abstractions
On Thu, May 30, 2024 at 01:24:33PM +0900, FUJITA Tomonori wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, 30 May 2024 04:01:39 +0200
> Danilo Krummrich <dakr at redhat.com> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, May 30, 2024 at 08:28:24AM +0900, FUJITA Tomonori wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> On Wed, 29 May 2024 21:57:03 +0200
> >> Greg KH <gregkh at linuxfoundation.org>
2015 Apr 07
0
[PATCH v15 13/15] pvqspinlock: Only kick CPU at unlock time
Before this patch, a CPU may have been kicked twice before getting
the lock - one before it becomes queue head and once before it gets
the lock. All these CPU kicking and halting (VMEXIT) can be expensive
and slow down system performance, especially in an overcommitted guest.
This patch add a new vCPU state (vcpu_hashed) which enables the code
to delay CPU kicking until at unlock time. Once this
2005 Aug 12
3
IA32E make failed in latest version 6117
Hi all,
I found this problem in the latest xen-unstable 6117.
I reported a bug #154 to track it.
The log====>
<...>
gcc -nostdinc -fno-builtin -fno-common -fno-strict-aliasing -iwithprefix
include -Wall -Werror -Wno-pointer-arith -pipe -
I/home/nightly/builds_xen_unstable/xen-3.0-hg-xen-unstable-6096-
20050812/xen/include -I/home/nightly/builds_xen_unstable/xen-3.0-hg-xen-
2006 Sep 12
5
32E (64bit) VMX keyboard is out of control, if given an addition ''hde''
Hi,
This issue only happens on my IA32E VMX domain. IA32 VMX domain is okay.
I am trying VBD disk in IA32E VMX domain. I used following disk configuration to create an IA32E VMX domain.
disk = [ ''file:/mnt/disk1.img,hda,w'', ''file:/mnt/disk2.img,hde,w'' ]
After creating VMX, its keyboard can not be used properly. For example, if pressing
2009 Jan 16
1
[LLVMdev] Loop elimination with floating point counter.
On Jan 14, 2009, at 5:11 AM, Syoyo Fujita wrote:
> Thanks for many comments.
>
> The loop with finite fp values(which could be representable in IEEE754
> fp format) such like,
Sure, LLVM could definitely do this. If you're interested, I'd
suggest starting by extending the existing code that we have to do
this. The existing code just handles increments by unit constants,
2006 Sep 29
1
[Xen-ia64-devel] RE: IPF/Xen VTI domain testing report for Xen 3.0.3 RC1
>5. LTP testing might run very slow in SMP VTI Domain with credit scheduler. If binding VTI
>and Xen0 vcpu, this bug won''t be there.
Hi keir,
In credit scheduler, two vcpus in the same domain may be scheduled on the same CPU. For instance, vcpu0 and vcpu1 are running on the same CPU, vcpu0 is doing spin_lock in guest, then time slice is due, vcpu0 is scheduled out before doing
2015 Mar 16
0
[PATCH 8/9] qspinlock: Generic paravirt support
Implement simple paravirt support for the qspinlock.
Provide a separate (second) version of the spin_lock_slowpath for
paravirt along with a special unlock path.
The second slowpath is generated by adding a few pv hooks to the
normal slowpath, but where those will compile away for the native
case, they expand into special wait/wake code for the pv version.
The actual MCS queue can use extra
2015 Mar 16
0
[PATCH 8/9] qspinlock: Generic paravirt support
Implement simple paravirt support for the qspinlock.
Provide a separate (second) version of the spin_lock_slowpath for
paravirt along with a special unlock path.
The second slowpath is generated by adding a few pv hooks to the
normal slowpath, but where those will compile away for the native
case, they expand into special wait/wake code for the pv version.
The actual MCS queue can use extra
2009 Jan 08
0
[LLVMdev] Loop elimination with floating point counter.
On Jan 8, 2009, at 4:36 AM, Syoyo Fujita wrote:
> Hi LLVM-ers,
>
> I'd like to eliminate dead loop with floating point counter using
> LLVM, but the following loop wasn't optimized by opt.
>
> void
> func() {
> float i;
> for (i = 0.0f; i < 1000.0f; i += 1.2f) {
> }
> }
FWIW, LLVM optimizer can eliminate this loop if i is incremented by 1.0f
2009 Jan 08
2
[LLVMdev] Loop elimination with floating point counter.
Hi Devang,
Thanks. Yes, in the case variable i incremented by 1.0f is optimized.
I don't know why...
Anyway, I've filed this problem into bugzilla(Bug 3299)
--
Syoyo
On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 12:42 AM, Devang Patel <dpatel at apple.com> wrote:
>
> On Jan 8, 2009, at 4:36 AM, Syoyo Fujita wrote:
>
>> Hi LLVM-ers,
>>
>> I'd like to eliminate dead loop