From: Alexander Graf <agraf@suse.de>
To: Alexey Kardashevskiy <aik@ozlabs.ru>, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>, Gleb Natapov <gleb@kernel.org>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] Prepare for in-kernel VFIO DMA operations acceleration
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2014 10:37:29 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <53ABF7E9.7040104@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <53AB625A.5040305@ozlabs.ru>
On 26.06.14 01:59, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
> On 06/26/2014 07:12 AM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>> On 06.06.14 02:20, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
>>> On 06/05/2014 09:57 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>>>> On 05.06.14 09:25, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
>>>>> This reserves 2 capability numbers.
>>>>>
>>>>> This implements an extended version of KVM_CREATE_SPAPR_TCE_64 ioctl.
>>>>>
>>>>> Please advise how to proceed with these patches as I suspect that
>>>>> first two should go via Paolo's tree while the last one via Alex Graf's
>>>>> tree
>>>>> (correct?).
>>>> They would just go via my tree, but only be actually allocated (read:
>>>> mergable to qemu) when they hit Paolo's tree.
>>>>
>>>> In fact, I don't think it makes sense to split them off at all.
>>> So? Are these patches going anywhere? Thanks.
>> So? Are you going to address the comments?
> Sorry, I cannot find here anything to fix. Ben asked some questions, I
> answered and there were no objections. What do I miss this time?...
> >> In fact, the code as is today can allocate an arbitrary amount of pinned
> >> kernel memory from within user space without any checks.
> >
> > Right. We should at least account it in the locked limit.
>
> Yup. And (probably) this thing will keep a counter of how many windows were
> created per KVM instance to avoid having multiple copies of the same table.
Alex
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Alexander Graf <agraf@suse.de>
To: Alexey Kardashevskiy <aik@ozlabs.ru>, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, Gleb Natapov <gleb@kernel.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] Prepare for in-kernel VFIO DMA operations acceleration
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2014 12:37:29 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <53ABF7E9.7040104@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <53AB625A.5040305@ozlabs.ru>
On 26.06.14 01:59, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
> On 06/26/2014 07:12 AM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>> On 06.06.14 02:20, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
>>> On 06/05/2014 09:57 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>>>> On 05.06.14 09:25, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
>>>>> This reserves 2 capability numbers.
>>>>>
>>>>> This implements an extended version of KVM_CREATE_SPAPR_TCE_64 ioctl.
>>>>>
>>>>> Please advise how to proceed with these patches as I suspect that
>>>>> first two should go via Paolo's tree while the last one via Alex Graf's
>>>>> tree
>>>>> (correct?).
>>>> They would just go via my tree, but only be actually allocated (read:
>>>> mergable to qemu) when they hit Paolo's tree.
>>>>
>>>> In fact, I don't think it makes sense to split them off at all.
>>> So? Are these patches going anywhere? Thanks.
>> So? Are you going to address the comments?
> Sorry, I cannot find here anything to fix. Ben asked some questions, I
> answered and there were no objections. What do I miss this time?...
> >> In fact, the code as is today can allocate an arbitrary amount of pinned
> >> kernel memory from within user space without any checks.
> >
> > Right. We should at least account it in the locked limit.
>
> Yup. And (probably) this thing will keep a counter of how many windows were
> created per KVM instance to avoid having multiple copies of the same table.
Alex
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Alexander Graf <agraf@suse.de>
To: Alexey Kardashevskiy <aik@ozlabs.ru>, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>, Gleb Natapov <gleb@kernel.org>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] Prepare for in-kernel VFIO DMA operations acceleration
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2014 12:37:29 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <53ABF7E9.7040104@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <53AB625A.5040305@ozlabs.ru>
On 26.06.14 01:59, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
> On 06/26/2014 07:12 AM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>> On 06.06.14 02:20, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
>>> On 06/05/2014 09:57 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>>>> On 05.06.14 09:25, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
>>>>> This reserves 2 capability numbers.
>>>>>
>>>>> This implements an extended version of KVM_CREATE_SPAPR_TCE_64 ioctl.
>>>>>
>>>>> Please advise how to proceed with these patches as I suspect that
>>>>> first two should go via Paolo's tree while the last one via Alex Graf's
>>>>> tree
>>>>> (correct?).
>>>> They would just go via my tree, but only be actually allocated (read:
>>>> mergable to qemu) when they hit Paolo's tree.
>>>>
>>>> In fact, I don't think it makes sense to split them off at all.
>>> So? Are these patches going anywhere? Thanks.
>> So? Are you going to address the comments?
> Sorry, I cannot find here anything to fix. Ben asked some questions, I
> answered and there were no objections. What do I miss this time?...
> >> In fact, the code as is today can allocate an arbitrary amount of pinned
> >> kernel memory from within user space without any checks.
> >
> > Right. We should at least account it in the locked limit.
>
> Yup. And (probably) this thing will keep a counter of how many windows were
> created per KVM instance to avoid having multiple copies of the same table.
Alex
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-06-26 10:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 50+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-06-05 7:25 [PATCH 0/3] Prepare for in-kernel VFIO DMA operations acceleration Alexey Kardashevskiy
2014-06-05 7:25 ` Alexey Kardashevskiy
2014-06-05 7:25 ` Alexey Kardashevskiy
2014-06-05 7:25 ` [PATCH 1/3] PPC: KVM: Reserve KVM_CAP_SPAPR_TCE_VFIO capability number Alexey Kardashevskiy
2014-06-05 7:25 ` Alexey Kardashevskiy
2014-06-05 7:25 ` Alexey Kardashevskiy
2014-06-05 7:25 ` [PATCH 2/3] PPC: KVM: Reserve KVM_CAP_SPAPR_TCE_64 " Alexey Kardashevskiy
2014-06-05 7:25 ` Alexey Kardashevskiy
2014-06-05 7:25 ` Alexey Kardashevskiy
2014-06-05 7:25 ` Alexey Kardashevskiy
2014-06-05 7:25 ` [PATCH 3/3] PPC: KVM: Add support for 64bit TCE windows Alexey Kardashevskiy
2014-06-05 7:25 ` Alexey Kardashevskiy
2014-06-05 7:25 ` Alexey Kardashevskiy
2014-06-05 7:38 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2014-06-05 7:38 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2014-06-05 7:38 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2014-06-05 9:26 ` Alexey Kardashevskiy
2014-06-05 9:26 ` Alexey Kardashevskiy
2014-06-05 9:26 ` Alexey Kardashevskiy
2014-06-05 10:27 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2014-06-05 10:27 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2014-06-05 10:27 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2014-06-05 10:27 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2014-06-05 11:56 ` Alexander Graf
2014-06-05 11:56 ` Alexander Graf
2014-06-05 11:56 ` Alexander Graf
2014-06-05 12:30 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2014-06-05 12:30 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2014-06-05 12:30 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2014-06-05 12:32 ` Alexander Graf
2014-06-05 12:32 ` Alexander Graf
2014-06-05 12:32 ` Alexander Graf
2014-06-05 13:04 ` Alexey Kardashevskiy
2014-06-05 13:04 ` Alexey Kardashevskiy
2014-06-05 13:04 ` Alexey Kardashevskiy
2014-06-05 11:57 ` [PATCH 0/3] Prepare for in-kernel VFIO DMA operations acceleration Alexander Graf
2014-06-05 11:57 ` Alexander Graf
2014-06-05 11:57 ` Alexander Graf
2014-06-06 0:20 ` Alexey Kardashevskiy
2014-06-06 0:20 ` Alexey Kardashevskiy
2014-06-06 0:20 ` Alexey Kardashevskiy
2014-06-25 21:12 ` Alexander Graf
2014-06-25 21:12 ` Alexander Graf
2014-06-25 21:12 ` Alexander Graf
2014-06-25 23:59 ` Alexey Kardashevskiy
2014-06-25 23:59 ` Alexey Kardashevskiy
2014-06-25 23:59 ` Alexey Kardashevskiy
2014-06-26 10:37 ` Alexander Graf [this message]
2014-06-26 10:37 ` Alexander Graf
2014-06-26 10:37 ` Alexander Graf
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=53ABF7E9.7040104@suse.de \
--to=agraf@suse.de \
--cc=aik@ozlabs.ru \
--cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=gleb@kernel.org \
--cc=kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=paulus@samba.org \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.