linux-next: manual merge of the kvm tree with the s390 tree

linux-next: manual merge of the kvm tree with the s390 tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the kvm tree got a conflict in:

  arch/s390/mm/gmap.c

between commit:

  f04540298440 ("s390/mm: fix gmap tlb flush issues")

from the s390 tree and commit:

  6ea427bbbd40 ("s390/mm: add reference counter to gmap structure")

from the kvm tree.

I fixed it up (I just assumed that the update to gmap_free is no longer
needed) and can carry the fix as necessary. This is now fixed as far as
linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial conflicts should be mentioned
to your upstream maintainer when your tree is submitted for merging.
You may also want to consider cooperating with the maintainer of the
conflicting tree to minimise any particularly complex conflicts.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the kvm tree with the s390 tree

[David Hildenbrand]

> Hi all,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the kvm tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   arch/s390/mm/gmap.c
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   f04540298440 ("s390/mm: fix gmap tlb flush issues")
> 
> from the s390 tree and commit:
> 
>   6ea427bbbd40 ("s390/mm: add reference counter to gmap structure")
> 
> from the kvm tree.
> 
> I fixed it up (I just assumed that the update to gmap_free is no longer
> needed) and can carry the fix as necessary. This is now fixed as far as
> linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial conflicts should be mentioned
> to your upstream maintainer when your tree is submitted for merging.
> You may also want to consider cooperating with the maintainer of the
> conflicting tree to minimise any particularly complex conflicts.
> 

Yes, the tlb flush will be done in gmap_remove() instead of in gmap_free(),
which is also fixed by commit f04540298440. Unfortunately, that stable fix was
inevitable and collided with the already submitted patches for nested
virtualization.

Thanks for fixing that up, looks good to me.

David

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the kvm tree with the s390 tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1047 bytes --]

Hi all,

On Fri, 29 May 2020 16:46:13 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the kvm tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   arch/s390/kvm/vsie.c
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   0b0ed657fe00 ("s390: remove critical section cleanup from entry.S")
> 
> from the s390 tree and commit:
> 
>   d075fc3154be ("KVM: s390: vsie: Move conditional reschedule")
> 
> from the kvm tree.
> 
> diff --cc arch/s390/kvm/vsie.c
> index 4fde24a1856e,ef05b4e167fb..000000000000
> --- a/arch/s390/kvm/vsie.c
> +++ b/arch/s390/kvm/vsie.c
> @@@ -1000,9 -1000,9 +1000,6 @@@ static int do_vsie_run(struct kvm_vcpu 
>   
>   	handle_last_fault(vcpu, vsie_page);
>   
> - 	if (need_resched())
> - 		schedule();
>  -	if (test_cpu_flag(CIF_MCCK_PENDING))
>  -		s390_handle_mcck();
> --
>   	srcu_read_unlock(&vcpu->kvm->srcu, vcpu->srcu_idx);
>   
>   	/* save current guest state of bp isolation override */

This is now a conflict between the s390 tree and Linus' tree.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

linux-next: manual merge of the kvm tree with the s390 tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1213 bytes --]

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the kvm tree got a conflict in:

  arch/s390/kvm/vsie.c

between commit:

  0b0ed657fe00 ("s390: remove critical section cleanup from entry.S")

from the s390 tree and commit:

  d075fc3154be ("KVM: s390: vsie: Move conditional reschedule")

from the kvm tree.

I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial
conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree
is submitted for merging.  You may also want to consider cooperating
with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly
complex conflicts.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

diff --cc arch/s390/kvm/vsie.c
index 4fde24a1856e,ef05b4e167fb..000000000000
--- a/arch/s390/kvm/vsie.c
+++ b/arch/s390/kvm/vsie.c
@@@ -1000,9 -1000,9 +1000,6 @@@ static int do_vsie_run(struct kvm_vcpu 
  
  	handle_last_fault(vcpu, vsie_page);
  
- 	if (need_resched())
- 		schedule();
 -	if (test_cpu_flag(CIF_MCCK_PENDING))
 -		s390_handle_mcck();
--
  	srcu_read_unlock(&vcpu->kvm->srcu, vcpu->srcu_idx);
  
  	/* save current guest state of bp isolation override */

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the kvm tree with the s390 tree

[Heiko Carstens]

On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 02:36:58PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the kvm tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   arch/s390/hypfs/hypfs_diag.c
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   e030c1125eab ("s390/hypfs: use basic block for diag inline assembly")
> 
> from the s390 tree and commit:
> 
>   e65f30e0cb29 ("s390: hypfs: Move diag implementation and data definitions")
> 
> from the kvm tree.
> 
> I fixed it up (my fixup patch now looks like below) and can carry the
> fix as necessary. This is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned,
> but any non trivial conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream
> maintainer when your tree is submitted for merging.  You may also want
> to consider cooperating with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to
> minimise any particularly complex conflicts.
> 
> From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
> Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2016 14:47:33 +1000
> Subject: [PATCH] s390: merge fix up for __diag204 move
> 
> Signed-off-by: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
> ---
>  arch/s390/kernel/diag.c | 14 ++++++++------
>  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

The fix looks good. Thanks!

linux-next: manual merge of the kvm tree with the s390 tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the kvm tree got a conflict in:

  arch/s390/hypfs/hypfs_diag.c

between commit:

  e030c1125eab ("s390/hypfs: use basic block for diag inline assembly")

from the s390 tree and commit:

  e65f30e0cb29 ("s390: hypfs: Move diag implementation and data definitions")

from the kvm tree.

I fixed it up (my fixup patch now looks like below) and can carry the
fix as necessary. This is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned,
but any non trivial conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream
maintainer when your tree is submitted for merging.  You may also want
to consider cooperating with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to
minimise any particularly complex conflicts.

From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2016 14:47:33 +1000
Subject: [PATCH] s390: merge fix up for __diag204 move

Signed-off-by: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
---
 arch/s390/kernel/diag.c | 14 ++++++++------
 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/s390/kernel/diag.c b/arch/s390/kernel/diag.c
index a44faf4a0454..a97354c8c667 100644
--- a/arch/s390/kernel/diag.c
+++ b/arch/s390/kernel/diag.c
@@ -162,25 +162,27 @@ int diag14(unsigned long rx, unsigned long ry1, unsigned long subcode)
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL(diag14);
 
-static inline int __diag204(unsigned long subcode, unsigned long size, void *addr)
+static inline int __diag204(unsigned long *subcode, unsigned long size, void *addr)
 {
-	register unsigned long _subcode asm("0") = subcode;
+	register unsigned long _subcode asm("0") = *subcode;
 	register unsigned long _size asm("1") = size;
 
 	asm volatile(
 		"	diag	%2,%0,0x204\n"
-		"0:\n"
+		"0:	nopr	%%r7\n"
 		EX_TABLE(0b,0b)
 		: "+d" (_subcode), "+d" (_size) : "d" (addr) : "memory");
-	if (_subcode)
-		return -1;
+	*subcode = _subcode;
 	return _size;
 }
 
 int diag204(unsigned long subcode, unsigned long size, void *addr)
 {
 	diag_stat_inc(DIAG_STAT_X204);
-	return __diag204(subcode, size, addr);
+	size = __diag204(&subcode, size, addr);
+	if (subcode)
+		return -1;
+	return size;
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL(diag204);
 
-- 
2.8.1

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell