mbox series

[GIT,PULL] KVM/arm64 fixes for 5.9

Message ID 20200904104530.1082676-1-maz@kernel.org (mailing list archive)
State New, archived
Headers show
Series [GIT,PULL] KVM/arm64 fixes for 5.9 | expand

Pull-request

git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/kvmarm/kvmarm.git tags/kvmarm-fixes-5.9-1

Message

Marc Zyngier Sept. 4, 2020, 10:45 a.m. UTC
Hi Paolo,

Here's a bunch of fixes for 5.9. The gist of it is the stolen time
rework from Andrew, but we also have a couple of MM fixes that have
surfaced as people have started to use hugetlbfs in anger.

Please pull,

	M.

The following changes since commit 9123e3a74ec7b934a4a099e98af6a61c2f80bbf5:

  Linux 5.9-rc1 (2020-08-16 13:04:57 -0700)

are available in the Git repository at:

  git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/kvmarm/kvmarm.git tags/kvmarm-fixes-5.9-1

for you to fetch changes up to 7b75cd5128421c673153efb1236705696a1a9812:

  KVM: arm64: Update page shift if stage 2 block mapping not supported (2020-09-04 10:53:48 +0100)

----------------------------------------------------------------
KVM/arm64 fixes for Linux 5.9, take #1

- Multiple stolen time fixes, with a new capability to match x86
- Fix for hugetlbfs mappings when PUD and PMD are the same level
- Fix for hugetlbfs mappings when PTE mappings are enforced
  (dirty logging, for example)
- Fix tracing output of 64bit values

----------------------------------------------------------------
Alexandru Elisei (1):
      KVM: arm64: Update page shift if stage 2 block mapping not supported

Andrew Jones (6):
      KVM: arm64: pvtime: steal-time is only supported when configured
      KVM: arm64: pvtime: Fix potential loss of stolen time
      KVM: arm64: Drop type input from kvm_put_guest
      KVM: arm64: pvtime: Fix stolen time accounting across migration
      KVM: Documentation: Minor fixups
      arm64/x86: KVM: Introduce steal-time cap

Marc Zyngier (2):
      KVM: arm64: Do not try to map PUDs when they are folded into PMD
      KVM: arm64: Fix address truncation in traces

 Documentation/virt/kvm/api.rst     | 22 ++++++++++++++++++----
 arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h  |  2 +-
 arch/arm64/kvm/arm.c               |  3 +++
 arch/arm64/kvm/mmu.c               |  8 +++++++-
 arch/arm64/kvm/pvtime.c            | 29 +++++++++++++----------------
 arch/arm64/kvm/trace_arm.h         | 16 ++++++++--------
 arch/arm64/kvm/trace_handle_exit.h |  6 +++---
 arch/x86/kvm/x86.c                 |  3 +++
 include/linux/kvm_host.h           | 31 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
 include/uapi/linux/kvm.h           |  1 +
 10 files changed, 83 insertions(+), 38 deletions(-)

Comments

Paolo Bonzini Sept. 9, 2020, 3:20 p.m. UTC | #1
On 04/09/20 12:45, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> Hi Paolo,
> 
> Here's a bunch of fixes for 5.9. The gist of it is the stolen time
> rework from Andrew, but we also have a couple of MM fixes that have
> surfaced as people have started to use hugetlbfs in anger.

Hi Marc,

I'll get to this next Friday.

Paolo

> Please pull,
> 
> 	M.
> 
> The following changes since commit 9123e3a74ec7b934a4a099e98af6a61c2f80bbf5:
> 
>   Linux 5.9-rc1 (2020-08-16 13:04:57 -0700)
> 
> are available in the Git repository at:
> 
>   git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/kvmarm/kvmarm.git tags/kvmarm-fixes-5.9-1
> 
> for you to fetch changes up to 7b75cd5128421c673153efb1236705696a1a9812:
> 
>   KVM: arm64: Update page shift if stage 2 block mapping not supported (2020-09-04 10:53:48 +0100)
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> KVM/arm64 fixes for Linux 5.9, take #1
> 
> - Multiple stolen time fixes, with a new capability to match x86
> - Fix for hugetlbfs mappings when PUD and PMD are the same level
> - Fix for hugetlbfs mappings when PTE mappings are enforced
>   (dirty logging, for example)
> - Fix tracing output of 64bit values
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> Alexandru Elisei (1):
>       KVM: arm64: Update page shift if stage 2 block mapping not supported
> 
> Andrew Jones (6):
>       KVM: arm64: pvtime: steal-time is only supported when configured
>       KVM: arm64: pvtime: Fix potential loss of stolen time
>       KVM: arm64: Drop type input from kvm_put_guest
>       KVM: arm64: pvtime: Fix stolen time accounting across migration
>       KVM: Documentation: Minor fixups
>       arm64/x86: KVM: Introduce steal-time cap
> 
> Marc Zyngier (2):
>       KVM: arm64: Do not try to map PUDs when they are folded into PMD
>       KVM: arm64: Fix address truncation in traces
> 
>  Documentation/virt/kvm/api.rst     | 22 ++++++++++++++++++----
>  arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h  |  2 +-
>  arch/arm64/kvm/arm.c               |  3 +++
>  arch/arm64/kvm/mmu.c               |  8 +++++++-
>  arch/arm64/kvm/pvtime.c            | 29 +++++++++++++----------------
>  arch/arm64/kvm/trace_arm.h         | 16 ++++++++--------
>  arch/arm64/kvm/trace_handle_exit.h |  6 +++---
>  arch/x86/kvm/x86.c                 |  3 +++
>  include/linux/kvm_host.h           | 31 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
>  include/uapi/linux/kvm.h           |  1 +
>  10 files changed, 83 insertions(+), 38 deletions(-)
>
Marc Zyngier Sept. 9, 2020, 5:15 p.m. UTC | #2
On 2020-09-09 16:20, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 04/09/20 12:45, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>> Hi Paolo,
>> 
>> Here's a bunch of fixes for 5.9. The gist of it is the stolen time
>> rework from Andrew, but we also have a couple of MM fixes that have
>> surfaced as people have started to use hugetlbfs in anger.
> 
> Hi Marc,
> 
> I'll get to this next Friday.

Thanks. I may have another one for you by then though...

         M.
Paolo Bonzini Sept. 9, 2020, 5:20 p.m. UTC | #3
On 09/09/20 19:15, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On 2020-09-09 16:20, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> On 04/09/20 12:45, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>>> Hi Paolo,
>>>
>>> Here's a bunch of fixes for 5.9. The gist of it is the stolen time
>>> rework from Andrew, but we also have a couple of MM fixes that have
>>> surfaced as people have started to use hugetlbfs in anger.
>>
>> Hi Marc,
>>
>> I'll get to this next Friday.
> 
> Thanks. I may have another one for you by then though...

Sure, you can choose whether to send a separate tag or update this one.

Paolo