From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
To: David Stevens <stevensd@chromium.org>,
Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>,
Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@kernel.org>,
Aleksandar Markovic <aleksandar.qemu.devel@gmail.com>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@ozlabs.org>,
Zhenyu Wang <zhenyuw@linux.intel.com>,
Zhi Wang <zhi.a.wang@intel.com>
Cc: James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
Alexandru Elisei <alexandru.elisei@arm.com>,
Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>,
Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>,
Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@tencent.com>,
Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>, Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-mips@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
intel-gvt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org,
intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
David Stevens <stevensd@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] KVM: Remove uses of struct page from x86 and arm64 MMU
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2021 08:57:37 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20baae77-785c-5d46-e00c-41d86c2fbc56@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210624035749.4054934-1-stevensd@google.com>
On 24/06/21 05:57, David Stevens wrote:
> KVM supports mapping VM_IO and VM_PFNMAP memory into the guest by using
> follow_pte in gfn_to_pfn. However, the resolved pfns may not have
> assoicated struct pages, so they should not be passed to pfn_to_page.
> This series removes such calls from the x86 and arm64 secondary MMU. To
> do this, this series modifies gfn_to_pfn to return a struct page in
> addition to a pfn, if the hva was resolved by gup. This allows the
> caller to call put_page only when necessated by gup.
>
> This series provides a helper function that unwraps the new return type
> of gfn_to_pfn to provide behavior identical to the old behavior. As I
> have no hardware to test powerpc/mips changes, the function is used
> there for minimally invasive changes. Additionally, as gfn_to_page and
> gfn_to_pfn_cache are not integrated with mmu notifier, they cannot be
> easily changed over to only use pfns.
>
> This addresses CVE-2021-22543 on x86 and arm64.
Thank you very much for this. I agree that it makes sense to have a
minimal change; I had similar changes almost ready, but was stuck with
deadlocks in the gfn_to_pfn_cache case. In retrospect I should have
posted something similar to your patches.
I have started reviewing the patches, and they look good. I will try to
include them in 5.13.
Paolo
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
To: David Stevens <stevensd@chromium.org>,
Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>,
Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@kernel.org>,
Aleksandar Markovic <aleksandar.qemu.devel@gmail.com>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@ozlabs.org>,
Zhenyu Wang <zhenyuw@linux.intel.com>,
Zhi Wang <zhi.a.wang@intel.com>
Cc: David Stevens <stevensd@google.com>,
intel-gvt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org,
Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@tencent.com>,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>,
Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org, linux-mips@vger.kernel.org,
James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org,
Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>,
Alexandru Elisei <alexandru.elisei@arm.com>,
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] KVM: Remove uses of struct page from x86 and arm64 MMU
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2021 08:57:37 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20baae77-785c-5d46-e00c-41d86c2fbc56@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210624035749.4054934-1-stevensd@google.com>
On 24/06/21 05:57, David Stevens wrote:
> KVM supports mapping VM_IO and VM_PFNMAP memory into the guest by using
> follow_pte in gfn_to_pfn. However, the resolved pfns may not have
> assoicated struct pages, so they should not be passed to pfn_to_page.
> This series removes such calls from the x86 and arm64 secondary MMU. To
> do this, this series modifies gfn_to_pfn to return a struct page in
> addition to a pfn, if the hva was resolved by gup. This allows the
> caller to call put_page only when necessated by gup.
>
> This series provides a helper function that unwraps the new return type
> of gfn_to_pfn to provide behavior identical to the old behavior. As I
> have no hardware to test powerpc/mips changes, the function is used
> there for minimally invasive changes. Additionally, as gfn_to_page and
> gfn_to_pfn_cache are not integrated with mmu notifier, they cannot be
> easily changed over to only use pfns.
>
> This addresses CVE-2021-22543 on x86 and arm64.
Thank you very much for this. I agree that it makes sense to have a
minimal change; I had similar changes almost ready, but was stuck with
deadlocks in the gfn_to_pfn_cache case. In retrospect I should have
posted something similar to your patches.
I have started reviewing the patches, and they look good. I will try to
include them in 5.13.
Paolo
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
To: David Stevens <stevensd@chromium.org>,
Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>,
Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@kernel.org>,
Aleksandar Markovic <aleksandar.qemu.devel@gmail.com>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@ozlabs.org>,
Zhenyu Wang <zhenyuw@linux.intel.com>,
Zhi Wang <zhi.a.wang@intel.com>
Cc: David Stevens <stevensd@google.com>,
intel-gvt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org,
Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@tencent.com>,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>,
Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org, linux-mips@vger.kernel.org,
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org,
Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>,
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] KVM: Remove uses of struct page from x86 and arm64 MMU
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2021 08:57:37 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20baae77-785c-5d46-e00c-41d86c2fbc56@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210624035749.4054934-1-stevensd@google.com>
On 24/06/21 05:57, David Stevens wrote:
> KVM supports mapping VM_IO and VM_PFNMAP memory into the guest by using
> follow_pte in gfn_to_pfn. However, the resolved pfns may not have
> assoicated struct pages, so they should not be passed to pfn_to_page.
> This series removes such calls from the x86 and arm64 secondary MMU. To
> do this, this series modifies gfn_to_pfn to return a struct page in
> addition to a pfn, if the hva was resolved by gup. This allows the
> caller to call put_page only when necessated by gup.
>
> This series provides a helper function that unwraps the new return type
> of gfn_to_pfn to provide behavior identical to the old behavior. As I
> have no hardware to test powerpc/mips changes, the function is used
> there for minimally invasive changes. Additionally, as gfn_to_page and
> gfn_to_pfn_cache are not integrated with mmu notifier, they cannot be
> easily changed over to only use pfns.
>
> This addresses CVE-2021-22543 on x86 and arm64.
Thank you very much for this. I agree that it makes sense to have a
minimal change; I had similar changes almost ready, but was stuck with
deadlocks in the gfn_to_pfn_cache case. In retrospect I should have
posted something similar to your patches.
I have started reviewing the patches, and they look good. I will try to
include them in 5.13.
Paolo
_______________________________________________
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: David Stevens <stevensd@chromium.org>,
Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>,
Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@kernel.org>,
Aleksandar Markovic <aleksandar.qemu.devel@gmail.com>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@ozlabs.org>,
Zhenyu Wang <zhenyuw@linux.intel.com>,
Zhi Wang <zhi.a.wang@intel.com>
Cc: James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
Alexandru Elisei <alexandru.elisei@arm.com>,
Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>,
Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>,
Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@tencent.com>,
Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>, Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-mips@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
intel-gvt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org,
intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
David Stevens <stevensd@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] KVM: Remove uses of struct page from x86 and arm64 MMU
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2021 08:57:37 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20baae77-785c-5d46-e00c-41d86c2fbc56@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210624035749.4054934-1-stevensd@google.com>
On 24/06/21 05:57, David Stevens wrote:
> KVM supports mapping VM_IO and VM_PFNMAP memory into the guest by using
> follow_pte in gfn_to_pfn. However, the resolved pfns may not have
> assoicated struct pages, so they should not be passed to pfn_to_page.
> This series removes such calls from the x86 and arm64 secondary MMU. To
> do this, this series modifies gfn_to_pfn to return a struct page in
> addition to a pfn, if the hva was resolved by gup. This allows the
> caller to call put_page only when necessated by gup.
>
> This series provides a helper function that unwraps the new return type
> of gfn_to_pfn to provide behavior identical to the old behavior. As I
> have no hardware to test powerpc/mips changes, the function is used
> there for minimally invasive changes. Additionally, as gfn_to_page and
> gfn_to_pfn_cache are not integrated with mmu notifier, they cannot be
> easily changed over to only use pfns.
>
> This addresses CVE-2021-22543 on x86 and arm64.
Thank you very much for this. I agree that it makes sense to have a
minimal change; I had similar changes almost ready, but was stuck with
deadlocks in the gfn_to_pfn_cache case. In retrospect I should have
posted something similar to your patches.
I have started reviewing the patches, and they look good. I will try to
include them in 5.13.
Paolo
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
To: David Stevens <stevensd@chromium.org>,
Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>,
Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@kernel.org>,
Aleksandar Markovic <aleksandar.qemu.devel@gmail.com>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@ozlabs.org>,
Zhenyu Wang <zhenyuw@linux.intel.com>,
Zhi Wang <zhi.a.wang@intel.com>
Cc: David Stevens <stevensd@google.com>,
intel-gvt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org,
Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@tencent.com>,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>,
Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org, linux-mips@vger.kernel.org,
James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org,
Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>,
Alexandru Elisei <alexandru.elisei@arm.com>,
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 0/6] KVM: Remove uses of struct page from x86 and arm64 MMU
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2021 08:57:37 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20baae77-785c-5d46-e00c-41d86c2fbc56@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210624035749.4054934-1-stevensd@google.com>
On 24/06/21 05:57, David Stevens wrote:
> KVM supports mapping VM_IO and VM_PFNMAP memory into the guest by using
> follow_pte in gfn_to_pfn. However, the resolved pfns may not have
> assoicated struct pages, so they should not be passed to pfn_to_page.
> This series removes such calls from the x86 and arm64 secondary MMU. To
> do this, this series modifies gfn_to_pfn to return a struct page in
> addition to a pfn, if the hva was resolved by gup. This allows the
> caller to call put_page only when necessated by gup.
>
> This series provides a helper function that unwraps the new return type
> of gfn_to_pfn to provide behavior identical to the old behavior. As I
> have no hardware to test powerpc/mips changes, the function is used
> there for minimally invasive changes. Additionally, as gfn_to_page and
> gfn_to_pfn_cache are not integrated with mmu notifier, they cannot be
> easily changed over to only use pfns.
>
> This addresses CVE-2021-22543 on x86 and arm64.
Thank you very much for this. I agree that it makes sense to have a
minimal change; I had similar changes almost ready, but was stuck with
deadlocks in the gfn_to_pfn_cache case. In retrospect I should have
posted something similar to your patches.
I have started reviewing the patches, and they look good. I will try to
include them in 5.13.
Paolo
_______________________________________________
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: David Stevens <stevensd@chromium.org>,
Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>,
Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@kernel.org>,
Aleksandar Markovic <aleksandar.qemu.devel@gmail.com>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@ozlabs.org>,
Zhenyu Wang <zhenyuw@linux.intel.com>,
Zhi Wang <zhi.a.wang@intel.com>
Cc: James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
Alexandru Elisei <alexandru.elisei@arm.com>,
Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>,
Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>,
Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@tencent.com>,
Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>, Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-mips@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
intel-gvt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org,
intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
David Stevens <stevensd@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] KVM: Remove uses of struct page from x86 and arm64 MMU
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2021 06:57:37 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20baae77-785c-5d46-e00c-41d86c2fbc56@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210624035749.4054934-1-stevensd@google.com>
On 24/06/21 05:57, David Stevens wrote:
> KVM supports mapping VM_IO and VM_PFNMAP memory into the guest by using
> follow_pte in gfn_to_pfn. However, the resolved pfns may not have
> assoicated struct pages, so they should not be passed to pfn_to_page.
> This series removes such calls from the x86 and arm64 secondary MMU. To
> do this, this series modifies gfn_to_pfn to return a struct page in
> addition to a pfn, if the hva was resolved by gup. This allows the
> caller to call put_page only when necessated by gup.
>
> This series provides a helper function that unwraps the new return type
> of gfn_to_pfn to provide behavior identical to the old behavior. As I
> have no hardware to test powerpc/mips changes, the function is used
> there for minimally invasive changes. Additionally, as gfn_to_page and
> gfn_to_pfn_cache are not integrated with mmu notifier, they cannot be
> easily changed over to only use pfns.
>
> This addresses CVE-2021-22543 on x86 and arm64.
Thank you very much for this. I agree that it makes sense to have a
minimal change; I had similar changes almost ready, but was stuck with
deadlocks in the gfn_to_pfn_cache case. In retrospect I should have
posted something similar to your patches.
I have started reviewing the patches, and they look good. I will try to
include them in 5.13.
Paolo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-06-24 6:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 213+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-06-24 3:57 [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 ` [Intel-gfx] " 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 ` [PATCH 1/6] KVM: x86/mmu: release audited pfns David Stevens
2021-06-24 3:57 ` David Stevens
2021-06-24 3:57 ` [Intel-gfx] " 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 ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-24 8:43 ` Nicholas Piggin
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 9:43 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-06-24 9:43 ` Paolo Bonzini
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 15:36 ` Sean Christopherson
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 3:57 ` [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 ` [Intel-gfx] " 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 ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-24 8:52 ` Nicholas Piggin
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 9:42 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-06-24 9:42 ` Paolo Bonzini
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 9:57 ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-24 9:57 ` Nicholas Piggin
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 10:13 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-06-24 10:13 ` Paolo Bonzini
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 10:17 ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-24 10:17 ` Nicholas Piggin
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 10:21 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-06-24 10:21 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-06-24 10:21 ` [Intel-gfx] " 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 ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-24 10:42 ` Nicholas Piggin
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 9:40 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-06-24 9:40 ` Marc Zyngier
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 3:57 ` [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 ` [Intel-gfx] " 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 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-06-24 7:31 ` Paolo Bonzini
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 8:58 ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-24 8:58 ` Nicholas Piggin
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 10:06 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-06-24 10:06 ` Marc Zyngier
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 10:17 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-06-24 10:17 ` Paolo Bonzini
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 10:43 ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-24 10:43 ` Nicholas Piggin
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 3:57 ` [PATCH 4/6] KVM: arm64/mmu: " David Stevens
2021-06-24 3:57 ` David Stevens
2021-06-24 3:57 ` [Intel-gfx] " 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 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-06-24 10:43 ` Marc Zyngier
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 3:57 ` [PATCH 5/6] KVM: mmu: remove over-aggressive warnings David Stevens
2021-06-24 3:57 ` David Stevens
2021-06-24 3:57 ` [Intel-gfx] " 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 ` [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 ` [Intel-gfx] " 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 ` David Stevens
2021-06-24 4:28 ` 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 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 ` Paolo Bonzini [this message]
2021-06-24 6:57 ` [PATCH 0/6] " Paolo Bonzini
2021-06-24 6:57 ` [Intel-gfx] " 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 ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-24 10:34 ` Nicholas Piggin
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 11:42 ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-24 11:42 ` 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 12:00 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-06-24 12:00 ` Paolo Bonzini
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 12:41 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-06-24 12:41 ` 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 12:57 ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-24 12:57 ` Nicholas Piggin
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 15:35 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-06-24 15:35 ` Paolo Bonzini
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
2021-06-25 0:20 ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-25 0:20 ` Nicholas Piggin
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 7:44 ` Christian Borntraeger
2021-06-25 7:44 ` Christian Borntraeger
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
2021-06-24 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=20baae77-785c-5d46-e00c-41d86c2fbc56@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=paulus@ozlabs.org \
--cc=seanjc@google.com \
--cc=stevensd@chromium.org \
--cc=stevensd@google.com \
--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.