From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
To: kvm-riscv@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH -fixes v2] RISC-V: KVM: Require HAVE_KVM
Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2024 09:40:36 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZalilFSHBa_XHolD@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAAhSdy0SxZWdCHQVW0Bki+bHpg4qrHWV0aFzJq8V2xYtwsMWhw@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, Jan 18, 2024, Anup Patel wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 4, 2024 at 6:07?PM Andrew Jones <ajones@ventanamicro.com> wrote:
> >
> > KVM requires EVENTFD, which is selected by HAVE_KVM. Other KVM
> > supporting architectures select HAVE_KVM and then their KVM
> > Kconfigs ensure its there with a depends on HAVE_KVM. Make RISCV
> > consistent with that approach which fixes configs which have KVM
> > but not EVENTFD, as was discovered with a randconfig test.
> >
> > Fixes: 99cdc6c18c2d ("RISC-V: Add initial skeletal KVM support")
> > Reported-by: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>
> > Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/all/44907c6b-c5bd-4e4a-a921-e4d3825539d8 at infradead.org/
> > Signed-off-by: Andrew Jones <ajones@ventanamicro.com>
>
> Queued this patch for Linux-6.8
That should be unnecessary. Commit caadf876bb74 ("KVM: introduce CONFIG_KVM_COMMON"),
which is in Paolo's pull request for 6.8, addresses the EVENTFD issue. And the
rest of Paolo's series[*], which presumably will get queued for 6.9, eliminates
HAVE_KVM entirely.
[*] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240108124740.114453-6-pbonzini at redhat.com
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
To: Anup Patel <anup@brainfault.org>
Cc: Andrew Jones <ajones@ventanamicro.com>,
linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, linux-next@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
kvm-riscv@lists.infradead.org, paul.walmsley@sifive.com,
palmer@dabbelt.com, aou@eecs.berkeley.edu,
atishp@atishpatra.org, rdunlap@infradead.org,
sfr@canb.auug.org.au, alex@ghiti.fr, mpe@ellerman.id.au,
npiggin@gmail.com, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
pbonzini@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH -fixes v2] RISC-V: KVM: Require HAVE_KVM
Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2024 09:40:36 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZalilFSHBa_XHolD@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAAhSdy0SxZWdCHQVW0Bki+bHpg4qrHWV0aFzJq8V2xYtwsMWhw@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, Jan 18, 2024, Anup Patel wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 4, 2024 at 6:07 PM Andrew Jones <ajones@ventanamicro.com> wrote:
> >
> > KVM requires EVENTFD, which is selected by HAVE_KVM. Other KVM
> > supporting architectures select HAVE_KVM and then their KVM
> > Kconfigs ensure its there with a depends on HAVE_KVM. Make RISCV
> > consistent with that approach which fixes configs which have KVM
> > but not EVENTFD, as was discovered with a randconfig test.
> >
> > Fixes: 99cdc6c18c2d ("RISC-V: Add initial skeletal KVM support")
> > Reported-by: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>
> > Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/all/44907c6b-c5bd-4e4a-a921-e4d3825539d8@infradead.org/
> > Signed-off-by: Andrew Jones <ajones@ventanamicro.com>
>
> Queued this patch for Linux-6.8
That should be unnecessary. Commit caadf876bb74 ("KVM: introduce CONFIG_KVM_COMMON"),
which is in Paolo's pull request for 6.8, addresses the EVENTFD issue. And the
rest of Paolo's series[*], which presumably will get queued for 6.9, eliminates
HAVE_KVM entirely.
[*] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240108124740.114453-6-pbonzini@redhat.com
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
To: Anup Patel <anup@brainfault.org>
Cc: Andrew Jones <ajones@ventanamicro.com>,
linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, linux-next@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
kvm-riscv@lists.infradead.org, paul.walmsley@sifive.com,
palmer@dabbelt.com, aou@eecs.berkeley.edu,
atishp@atishpatra.org, rdunlap@infradead.org,
sfr@canb.auug.org.au, alex@ghiti.fr, mpe@ellerman.id.au,
npiggin@gmail.com, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
pbonzini@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH -fixes v2] RISC-V: KVM: Require HAVE_KVM
Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2024 09:40:36 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZalilFSHBa_XHolD@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAAhSdy0SxZWdCHQVW0Bki+bHpg4qrHWV0aFzJq8V2xYtwsMWhw@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, Jan 18, 2024, Anup Patel wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 4, 2024 at 6:07 PM Andrew Jones <ajones@ventanamicro.com> wrote:
> >
> > KVM requires EVENTFD, which is selected by HAVE_KVM. Other KVM
> > supporting architectures select HAVE_KVM and then their KVM
> > Kconfigs ensure its there with a depends on HAVE_KVM. Make RISCV
> > consistent with that approach which fixes configs which have KVM
> > but not EVENTFD, as was discovered with a randconfig test.
> >
> > Fixes: 99cdc6c18c2d ("RISC-V: Add initial skeletal KVM support")
> > Reported-by: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>
> > Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/all/44907c6b-c5bd-4e4a-a921-e4d3825539d8@infradead.org/
> > Signed-off-by: Andrew Jones <ajones@ventanamicro.com>
>
> Queued this patch for Linux-6.8
That should be unnecessary. Commit caadf876bb74 ("KVM: introduce CONFIG_KVM_COMMON"),
which is in Paolo's pull request for 6.8, addresses the EVENTFD issue. And the
rest of Paolo's series[*], which presumably will get queued for 6.9, eliminates
HAVE_KVM entirely.
[*] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240108124740.114453-6-pbonzini@redhat.com
_______________________________________________
linux-riscv mailing list
linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
To: Anup Patel <anup@brainfault.org>
Cc: sfr@canb.auug.org.au, aou@eecs.berkeley.edu, alex@ghiti.fr,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, atishp@atishpatra.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, npiggin@gmail.com,
linux-next@vger.kernel.org, palmer@dabbelt.com,
rdunlap@infradead.org, kvm-riscv@lists.infradead.org,
paul.walmsley@sifive.com, pbonzini@redhat.com,
linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
Andrew Jones <ajones@ventanamicro.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -fixes v2] RISC-V: KVM: Require HAVE_KVM
Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2024 09:40:36 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZalilFSHBa_XHolD@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAAhSdy0SxZWdCHQVW0Bki+bHpg4qrHWV0aFzJq8V2xYtwsMWhw@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, Jan 18, 2024, Anup Patel wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 4, 2024 at 6:07 PM Andrew Jones <ajones@ventanamicro.com> wrote:
> >
> > KVM requires EVENTFD, which is selected by HAVE_KVM. Other KVM
> > supporting architectures select HAVE_KVM and then their KVM
> > Kconfigs ensure its there with a depends on HAVE_KVM. Make RISCV
> > consistent with that approach which fixes configs which have KVM
> > but not EVENTFD, as was discovered with a randconfig test.
> >
> > Fixes: 99cdc6c18c2d ("RISC-V: Add initial skeletal KVM support")
> > Reported-by: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>
> > Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/all/44907c6b-c5bd-4e4a-a921-e4d3825539d8@infradead.org/
> > Signed-off-by: Andrew Jones <ajones@ventanamicro.com>
>
> Queued this patch for Linux-6.8
That should be unnecessary. Commit caadf876bb74 ("KVM: introduce CONFIG_KVM_COMMON"),
which is in Paolo's pull request for 6.8, addresses the EVENTFD issue. And the
rest of Paolo's series[*], which presumably will get queued for 6.9, eliminates
HAVE_KVM entirely.
[*] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240108124740.114453-6-pbonzini@redhat.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-01-18 17:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-01-04 12:37 [PATCH -fixes v2] RISC-V: KVM: Require HAVE_KVM Andrew Jones
2024-01-04 12:37 ` Andrew Jones
2024-01-04 12:37 ` Andrew Jones
2024-01-04 12:37 ` Andrew Jones
2024-01-04 16:02 ` Randy Dunlap
2024-01-04 16:02 ` Randy Dunlap
2024-01-04 16:02 ` Randy Dunlap
2024-01-04 16:02 ` Randy Dunlap
2024-01-18 12:59 ` Anup Patel
2024-01-18 12:59 ` Anup Patel
2024-01-18 12:59 ` Anup Patel
2024-01-18 12:59 ` Anup Patel
2024-01-18 17:40 ` Sean Christopherson [this message]
2024-01-18 17:40 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-01-18 17:40 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-01-18 17:40 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-01-19 3:12 ` Anup Patel
2024-01-19 3:12 ` Anup Patel
2024-01-19 3:12 ` Anup Patel
2024-01-19 3:12 ` Anup Patel
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=ZalilFSHBa_XHolD@google.com \
--to=seanjc@google.com \
--cc=kvm-riscv@lists.infradead.org \
/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.