From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
To: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>,
Aleksandar Markovic <aleksandar.qemu.devel@gmail.com>,
Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@kernel.org>,
Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>, Paul Mackerras <paulus@ozlabs.org>,
David Stevens <stevensd@chromium.org>,
Zhenyu Wang <zhenyuw@linux.intel.com>,
Zhi Wang <zhi.a.wang@intel.com>
Cc: Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@tencent.com>,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
Alexandru Elisei <alexandru.elisei@arm.com>,
intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org, Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>,
Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>,
linux-mips@vger.kernel.org, intel-gvt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org,
Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 2/6] KVM: mmu: also return page from gfn_to_pfn
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2021 12:21:01 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <fc2a88ed-6a98-857d-bb1f-73260b01ac30@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1624529635.75a1ann91v.astroid@bobo.none>
On 24/06/21 12:17, Nicholas Piggin wrote:
>> If all callers were updated that is one thing, but from the changelog
>> it sounds like that would not happen and there would be some gfn_to_pfn
>> users left over.
>>
>> But yes in the end you would either need to make gfn_to_pfn never return
>> a page found via follow_pte, or change all callers to the new way. If
>> the plan is for the latter then I guess that's fine.
>
> Actually in that case anyway I don't see the need -- the existence of
> gfn_to_pfn is enough to know it might be buggy. It can just as easily
> be grepped for as kvm_pfn_page_unwrap.
Sure, but that would leave us with longer function names
(gfn_to_pfn_page* instead of gfn_to_pfn*). So the "safe" use is the one
that looks worse and the unsafe use is the one that looks safe.
> And are gfn_to_page cases also
> vulernable to the same issue?
No, they're just broken for the VM_IO|VM_PFNMAP case.
Paolo
> So I think it could be marked deprecated or something if not everything
> will be converted in the one series, and don't need to touch all that
> arch code with this patch.
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
To: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>,
Aleksandar Markovic <aleksandar.qemu.devel@gmail.com>,
Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@kernel.org>,
Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>, Paul Mackerras <paulus@ozlabs.org>,
David Stevens <stevensd@chromium.org>,
Zhenyu Wang <zhenyuw@linux.intel.com>,
Zhi Wang <zhi.a.wang@intel.com>
Cc: Alexandru Elisei <alexandru.elisei@arm.com>,
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org,
intel-gvt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org,
James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>, Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mips@vger.kernel.org,
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>,
Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>,
Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@tencent.com>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] KVM: mmu: also return page from gfn_to_pfn
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2021 10:21:01 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <fc2a88ed-6a98-857d-bb1f-73260b01ac30@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1624529635.75a1ann91v.astroid@bobo.none>
On 24/06/21 12:17, Nicholas Piggin wrote:
>> If all callers were updated that is one thing, but from the changelog
>> it sounds like that would not happen and there would be some gfn_to_pfn
>> users left over.
>>
>> But yes in the end you would either need to make gfn_to_pfn never return
>> a page found via follow_pte, or change all callers to the new way. If
>> the plan is for the latter then I guess that's fine.
>
> Actually in that case anyway I don't see the need -- the existence of
> gfn_to_pfn is enough to know it might be buggy. It can just as easily
> be grepped for as kvm_pfn_page_unwrap.
Sure, but that would leave us with longer function names
(gfn_to_pfn_page* instead of gfn_to_pfn*). So the "safe" use is the one
that looks worse and the unsafe use is the one that looks safe.
> And are gfn_to_page cases also
> vulernable to the same issue?
No, they're just broken for the VM_IO|VM_PFNMAP case.
Paolo
> So I think it could be marked deprecated or something if not everything
> will be converted in the one series, and don't need to touch all that
> arch code with this patch.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
To: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>,
Aleksandar Markovic <aleksandar.qemu.devel@gmail.com>,
Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@kernel.org>,
Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>, Paul Mackerras <paulus@ozlabs.org>,
David Stevens <stevensd@chromium.org>,
Zhenyu Wang <zhenyuw@linux.intel.com>,
Zhi Wang <zhi.a.wang@intel.com>
Cc: Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@tencent.com>,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org,
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org, Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>,
Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>,
linux-mips@vger.kernel.org, intel-gvt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org,
Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] KVM: mmu: also return page from gfn_to_pfn
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2021 12:21:01 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <fc2a88ed-6a98-857d-bb1f-73260b01ac30@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1624529635.75a1ann91v.astroid@bobo.none>
On 24/06/21 12:17, Nicholas Piggin wrote:
>> If all callers were updated that is one thing, but from the changelog
>> it sounds like that would not happen and there would be some gfn_to_pfn
>> users left over.
>>
>> But yes in the end you would either need to make gfn_to_pfn never return
>> a page found via follow_pte, or change all callers to the new way. If
>> the plan is for the latter then I guess that's fine.
>
> Actually in that case anyway I don't see the need -- the existence of
> gfn_to_pfn is enough to know it might be buggy. It can just as easily
> be grepped for as kvm_pfn_page_unwrap.
Sure, but that would leave us with longer function names
(gfn_to_pfn_page* instead of gfn_to_pfn*). So the "safe" use is the one
that looks worse and the unsafe use is the one that looks safe.
> And are gfn_to_page cases also
> vulernable to the same issue?
No, they're just broken for the VM_IO|VM_PFNMAP case.
Paolo
> So I think it could be marked deprecated or something if not everything
> will be converted in the one series, and don't need to touch all that
> arch code with this patch.
_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
To: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>,
Aleksandar Markovic <aleksandar.qemu.devel@gmail.com>,
Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@kernel.org>,
Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>, Paul Mackerras <paulus@ozlabs.org>,
David Stevens <stevensd@chromium.org>,
Zhenyu Wang <zhenyuw@linux.intel.com>,
Zhi Wang <zhi.a.wang@intel.com>
Cc: Alexandru Elisei <alexandru.elisei@arm.com>,
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org,
intel-gvt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org,
James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>, Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mips@vger.kernel.org,
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>,
Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>,
Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@tencent.com>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] KVM: mmu: also return page from gfn_to_pfn
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2021 12:21:01 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <fc2a88ed-6a98-857d-bb1f-73260b01ac30@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1624529635.75a1ann91v.astroid@bobo.none>
On 24/06/21 12:17, Nicholas Piggin wrote:
>> If all callers were updated that is one thing, but from the changelog
>> it sounds like that would not happen and there would be some gfn_to_pfn
>> users left over.
>>
>> But yes in the end you would either need to make gfn_to_pfn never return
>> a page found via follow_pte, or change all callers to the new way. If
>> the plan is for the latter then I guess that's fine.
>
> Actually in that case anyway I don't see the need -- the existence of
> gfn_to_pfn is enough to know it might be buggy. It can just as easily
> be grepped for as kvm_pfn_page_unwrap.
Sure, but that would leave us with longer function names
(gfn_to_pfn_page* instead of gfn_to_pfn*). So the "safe" use is the one
that looks worse and the unsafe use is the one that looks safe.
> And are gfn_to_page cases also
> vulernable to the same issue?
No, they're just broken for the VM_IO|VM_PFNMAP case.
Paolo
> So I think it could be marked deprecated or something if not everything
> will be converted in the one series, and don't need to touch all that
> arch code with this patch.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
To: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>,
Aleksandar Markovic <aleksandar.qemu.devel@gmail.com>,
Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@kernel.org>,
Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>, Paul Mackerras <paulus@ozlabs.org>,
David Stevens <stevensd@chromium.org>,
Zhenyu Wang <zhenyuw@linux.intel.com>,
Zhi Wang <zhi.a.wang@intel.com>
Cc: Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@tencent.com>,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
Alexandru Elisei <alexandru.elisei@arm.com>,
intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org, Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>,
Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>,
linux-mips@vger.kernel.org, intel-gvt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org,
Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] KVM: mmu: also return page from gfn_to_pfn
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2021 12:21:01 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <fc2a88ed-6a98-857d-bb1f-73260b01ac30@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1624529635.75a1ann91v.astroid@bobo.none>
On 24/06/21 12:17, Nicholas Piggin wrote:
>> If all callers were updated that is one thing, but from the changelog
>> it sounds like that would not happen and there would be some gfn_to_pfn
>> users left over.
>>
>> But yes in the end you would either need to make gfn_to_pfn never return
>> a page found via follow_pte, or change all callers to the new way. If
>> the plan is for the latter then I guess that's fine.
>
> Actually in that case anyway I don't see the need -- the existence of
> gfn_to_pfn is enough to know it might be buggy. It can just as easily
> be grepped for as kvm_pfn_page_unwrap.
Sure, but that would leave us with longer function names
(gfn_to_pfn_page* instead of gfn_to_pfn*). So the "safe" use is the one
that looks worse and the unsafe use is the one that looks safe.
> And are gfn_to_page cases also
> vulernable to the same issue?
No, they're just broken for the VM_IO|VM_PFNMAP case.
Paolo
> So I think it could be marked deprecated or something if not everything
> will be converted in the one series, and don't need to touch all that
> arch code with this patch.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
To: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>,
Aleksandar Markovic <aleksandar.qemu.devel@gmail.com>,
Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@kernel.org>,
Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>, Paul Mackerras <paulus@ozlabs.org>,
David Stevens <stevensd@chromium.org>,
Zhenyu Wang <zhenyuw@linux.intel.com>,
Zhi Wang <zhi.a.wang@intel.com>
Cc: Alexandru Elisei <alexandru.elisei@arm.com>,
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org,
intel-gvt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org,
James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>, Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mips@vger.kernel.org,
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>,
Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>,
Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@tencent.com>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] KVM: mmu: also return page from gfn_to_pfn
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2021 12:21:01 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <fc2a88ed-6a98-857d-bb1f-73260b01ac30@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1624529635.75a1ann91v.astroid@bobo.none>
On 24/06/21 12:17, Nicholas Piggin wrote:
>> If all callers were updated that is one thing, but from the changelog
>> it sounds like that would not happen and there would be some gfn_to_pfn
>> users left over.
>>
>> But yes in the end you would either need to make gfn_to_pfn never return
>> a page found via follow_pte, or change all callers to the new way. If
>> the plan is for the latter then I guess that's fine.
>
> Actually in that case anyway I don't see the need -- the existence of
> gfn_to_pfn is enough to know it might be buggy. It can just as easily
> be grepped for as kvm_pfn_page_unwrap.
Sure, but that would leave us with longer function names
(gfn_to_pfn_page* instead of gfn_to_pfn*). So the "safe" use is the one
that looks worse and the unsafe use is the one that looks safe.
> And are gfn_to_page cases also
> vulernable to the same issue?
No, they're just broken for the VM_IO|VM_PFNMAP case.
Paolo
> So I think it could be marked deprecated or something if not everything
> will be converted in the one series, and don't need to touch all that
> arch code with this patch.
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-06-24 10:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 213+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-06-24 3:57 [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 0/6] KVM: Remove uses of struct page from x86 and arm64 MMU David Stevens
2021-06-24 3:57 ` David Stevens
2021-06-24 3:57 ` David Stevens
2021-06-24 3:57 ` David Stevens
2021-06-24 3:57 ` David Stevens
2021-06-24 3:57 ` David Stevens
2021-06-24 3:57 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 1/6] KVM: x86/mmu: release audited pfns David Stevens
2021-06-24 3:57 ` David Stevens
2021-06-24 3:57 ` David Stevens
2021-06-24 3:57 ` David Stevens
2021-06-24 3:57 ` David Stevens
2021-06-24 3:57 ` David Stevens
2021-06-24 8:43 ` [Intel-gfx] " Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-24 8:43 ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-24 8:43 ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-24 8:43 ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-24 8:43 ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-24 8:43 ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-24 9:43 ` [Intel-gfx] " Paolo Bonzini
2021-06-24 9:43 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-06-24 9:43 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-06-24 9:43 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-06-24 9:43 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-06-24 9:43 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-06-24 15:36 ` [Intel-gfx] " Sean Christopherson
2021-06-24 15:36 ` Sean Christopherson
2021-06-24 15:36 ` Sean Christopherson
2021-06-24 15:36 ` Sean Christopherson
2021-06-24 15:36 ` Sean Christopherson
2021-06-24 15:36 ` Sean Christopherson
2021-06-24 3:57 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 2/6] KVM: mmu: also return page from gfn_to_pfn David Stevens
2021-06-24 3:57 ` David Stevens
2021-06-24 3:57 ` David Stevens
2021-06-24 3:57 ` David Stevens
2021-06-24 3:57 ` David Stevens
2021-06-24 3:57 ` David Stevens
2021-06-24 8:52 ` [Intel-gfx] " Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-24 8:52 ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-24 8:52 ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-24 8:52 ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-24 8:52 ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-24 8:52 ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-24 9:42 ` [Intel-gfx] " Paolo Bonzini
2021-06-24 9:42 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-06-24 9:42 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-06-24 9:42 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-06-24 9:42 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-06-24 9:42 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-06-24 9:57 ` [Intel-gfx] " Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-24 9:57 ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-24 9:57 ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-24 9:57 ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-24 9:57 ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-24 9:57 ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-24 10:13 ` [Intel-gfx] " Paolo Bonzini
2021-06-24 10:13 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-06-24 10:13 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-06-24 10:13 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-06-24 10:13 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-06-24 10:13 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-06-24 10:17 ` [Intel-gfx] " Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-24 10:17 ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-24 10:17 ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-24 10:17 ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-24 10:17 ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-24 10:17 ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-24 10:21 ` Paolo Bonzini [this message]
2021-06-24 10:21 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-06-24 10:21 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-06-24 10:21 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-06-24 10:21 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-06-24 10:21 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-06-24 10:42 ` [Intel-gfx] " Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-24 10:42 ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-24 10:42 ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-24 10:42 ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-24 10:42 ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-24 10:42 ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-24 9:40 ` [Intel-gfx] " Marc Zyngier
2021-06-24 9:40 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-06-24 9:40 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-06-24 9:40 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-06-24 9:40 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-06-24 9:40 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-06-24 9:40 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-06-24 3:57 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 3/6] KVM: x86/mmu: avoid struct page in MMU David Stevens
2021-06-24 3:57 ` David Stevens
2021-06-24 3:57 ` David Stevens
2021-06-24 3:57 ` David Stevens
2021-06-24 3:57 ` David Stevens
2021-06-24 3:57 ` David Stevens
2021-06-24 7:31 ` [Intel-gfx] " Paolo Bonzini
2021-06-24 7:31 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-06-24 7:31 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-06-24 7:31 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-06-24 7:31 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-06-24 7:31 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-06-24 8:58 ` [Intel-gfx] " Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-24 8:58 ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-24 8:58 ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-24 8:58 ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-24 8:58 ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-24 8:58 ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-24 10:06 ` [Intel-gfx] " Marc Zyngier
2021-06-24 10:06 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-06-24 10:06 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-06-24 10:06 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-06-24 10:06 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-06-24 10:06 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-06-24 10:06 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-06-24 10:17 ` [Intel-gfx] " Paolo Bonzini
2021-06-24 10:17 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-06-24 10:17 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-06-24 10:17 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-06-24 10:17 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-06-24 10:17 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-06-24 10:17 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-06-24 10:43 ` [Intel-gfx] " Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-24 10:43 ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-24 10:43 ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-24 10:43 ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-24 10:43 ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-24 10:43 ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-24 10:43 ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-24 3:57 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 4/6] KVM: arm64/mmu: " David Stevens
2021-06-24 3:57 ` David Stevens
2021-06-24 3:57 ` David Stevens
2021-06-24 3:57 ` David Stevens
2021-06-24 3:57 ` David Stevens
2021-06-24 3:57 ` David Stevens
2021-06-24 10:43 ` [Intel-gfx] " Marc Zyngier
2021-06-24 10:43 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-06-24 10:43 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-06-24 10:43 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-06-24 10:43 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-06-24 10:43 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-06-24 10:43 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-06-24 3:57 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 5/6] KVM: mmu: remove over-aggressive warnings David Stevens
2021-06-24 3:57 ` David Stevens
2021-06-24 3:57 ` David Stevens
2021-06-24 3:57 ` David Stevens
2021-06-24 3:57 ` David Stevens
2021-06-24 3:57 ` David Stevens
2021-06-24 3:57 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 6/6] drm/i915/gvt: use gfn_to_pfn's page instead of pfn David Stevens
2021-06-24 3:57 ` David Stevens
2021-06-24 3:57 ` David Stevens
2021-06-24 3:57 ` David Stevens
2021-06-24 3:57 ` David Stevens
2021-06-24 3:57 ` David Stevens
2021-06-24 4:28 ` [Intel-gfx] " David Stevens
2021-06-24 4:28 ` David Stevens
2021-06-24 4:28 ` David Stevens
2021-06-24 4:28 ` David Stevens
2021-06-24 4:28 ` David Stevens
2021-06-24 4:28 ` David Stevens
2021-06-24 10:25 ` kernel test robot
2021-06-24 10:38 ` kernel test robot
2021-06-24 4:19 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BUILD: failure for KVM: Remove uses of struct page from x86 and arm64 MMU Patchwork
2021-06-24 6:57 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 0/6] " Paolo Bonzini
2021-06-24 6:57 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-06-24 6:57 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-06-24 6:57 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-06-24 6:57 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-06-24 6:57 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-06-24 10:34 ` [Intel-gfx] " Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-24 10:34 ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-24 10:34 ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-24 10:34 ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-24 10:34 ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-24 10:34 ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-24 11:42 ` [Intel-gfx] " Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-24 11:42 ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-24 11:42 ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-24 11:42 ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-24 11:42 ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-24 11:42 ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-24 12:00 ` [Intel-gfx] " Paolo Bonzini
2021-06-24 12:00 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-06-24 12:00 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-06-24 12:00 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-06-24 12:00 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-06-24 12:00 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-06-24 12:41 ` [Intel-gfx] " Paolo Bonzini
2021-06-24 12:41 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-06-24 12:41 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-06-24 12:41 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-06-24 12:41 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-06-24 12:41 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-06-24 12:57 ` [Intel-gfx] " Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-24 12:57 ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-24 12:57 ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-24 12:57 ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-24 12:57 ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-24 12:57 ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-24 15:35 ` [Intel-gfx] " Paolo Bonzini
2021-06-24 15:35 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-06-24 15:35 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-06-24 15:35 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-06-24 15:35 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-06-24 15:35 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-06-25 0:20 ` [Intel-gfx] " Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-25 0:20 ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-25 0:20 ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-25 0:20 ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-25 0:20 ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-25 0:20 ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-25 7:44 ` [Intel-gfx] " Christian Borntraeger
2021-06-25 7:44 ` Christian Borntraeger
2021-06-25 7:44 ` Christian Borntraeger
2021-06-25 7:44 ` Christian Borntraeger
2021-06-25 7:44 ` Christian Borntraeger
2021-06-25 7:44 ` Christian Borntraeger
2021-06-24 16:07 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BUILD: failure for KVM: Remove uses of struct page from x86 and arm64 MMU (rev3) Patchwork
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=fc2a88ed-6a98-857d-bb1f-73260b01ac30@redhat.com \
--to=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=aleksandar.qemu.devel@gmail.com \
--cc=alexandru.elisei@arm.com \
--cc=chenhuacai@kernel.org \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=intel-gvt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=james.morse@arm.com \
--cc=jmattson@google.com \
--cc=joro@8bytes.org \
--cc=kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mips@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=npiggin@gmail.com \
--cc=paulus@ozlabs.org \
--cc=seanjc@google.com \
--cc=stevensd@chromium.org \
--cc=suzuki.poulose@arm.com \
--cc=vkuznets@redhat.com \
--cc=wanpengli@tencent.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
--cc=zhenyuw@linux.intel.com \
--cc=zhi.a.wang@intel.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.