* [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 0/2] xen/arm: physical timer improvements @ 2020-01-21 15:07 Jeff Kubascik 2020-01-21 15:07 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 1/2] xen/arm: remove physical timer offset Jeff Kubascik 2020-01-21 15:07 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 2/2] xen/arm: Sign extend TimerValue when computing the CompareValue Jeff Kubascik 0 siblings, 2 replies; 7+ messages in thread From: Jeff Kubascik @ 2020-01-21 15:07 UTC (permalink / raw) To: xen-devel Cc: Stewart Hildebrand, Volodymyr Babchuk, Stefano Stabellini, Julien Grall This patch set improves the emulation of the physical timer by removing the physical timer offset and sign extend the TimerValue to better match the behavior described in the ARMv8 Reference Manual (ARM DDI 0487E.a), section D11.2.4. Changes in v2: - Update commit message to specify reference manual version and section - Change physical timer cval to hold hardware value - Make sure to sign extend TimerValue on writes. This was done by first casting the r pointer to (int32_t *), dereferencing it, then casting to uint64_t. Please let me know if there is a more correct way to do this Changes in v3: - Split TimerValue sign extension fix into separate patch - Update commit message to mention physical timer cleanup - Removed physical timer cval initialization line - Changed TimerValue sign extension to (uint64_t)(int32_t)*r - Account for condition where cval < boot_count Changes in v4: - Improved commit message for patch #2, as suggested/provided by Julien Jeff Kubascik (2): xen/arm: remove physical timer offset xen/arm: Sign extend TimerValue when computing the CompareValue xen/arch/arm/vtimer.c | 34 ++++++++++++++++++---------------- xen/include/asm-arm/domain.h | 3 --- 2 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-) -- 2.17.1 _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 1/2] xen/arm: remove physical timer offset 2020-01-21 15:07 [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 0/2] xen/arm: physical timer improvements Jeff Kubascik @ 2020-01-21 15:07 ` Jeff Kubascik 2020-01-23 12:32 ` Julien Grall 2020-01-21 15:07 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 2/2] xen/arm: Sign extend TimerValue when computing the CompareValue Jeff Kubascik 1 sibling, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread From: Jeff Kubascik @ 2020-01-21 15:07 UTC (permalink / raw) To: xen-devel Cc: Stewart Hildebrand, Volodymyr Babchuk, Stefano Stabellini, Julien Grall The physical timer traps apply an offset so that time starts at 0 for the guest. However, this offset is not currently applied to the physical counter. Per the ARMv8 Reference Manual (ARM DDI 0487E.a), section D11.2.4 Timers, the "Offset" between the counter and timer should be zero for a physical timer. This removes the offset to make the timer and counter consistent. This also cleans up the physical timer implementation to better match the virtual timer - both cval's now hold the hardware value. Signed-off-by: Jeff Kubascik <jeff.kubascik@dornerworks.com> --- xen/arch/arm/vtimer.c | 34 ++++++++++++++++++---------------- xen/include/asm-arm/domain.h | 3 --- 2 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-) diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/vtimer.c b/xen/arch/arm/vtimer.c index 240a850b6e..0c78a65863 100644 --- a/xen/arch/arm/vtimer.c +++ b/xen/arch/arm/vtimer.c @@ -62,7 +62,6 @@ static void virt_timer_expired(void *data) int domain_vtimer_init(struct domain *d, struct xen_arch_domainconfig *config) { - d->arch.phys_timer_base.offset = NOW(); d->arch.virt_timer_base.offset = READ_SYSREG64(CNTPCT_EL0); d->time_offset.seconds = ticks_to_ns(d->arch.virt_timer_base.offset - boot_count); do_div(d->time_offset.seconds, 1000000000); @@ -108,7 +107,6 @@ int vcpu_vtimer_init(struct vcpu *v) init_timer(&t->timer, phys_timer_expired, t, v->processor); t->ctl = 0; - t->cval = NOW(); t->irq = d0 ? timer_get_irq(TIMER_PHYS_NONSECURE_PPI) : GUEST_TIMER_PHYS_NS_PPI; @@ -167,6 +165,7 @@ void virt_timer_restore(struct vcpu *v) static bool vtimer_cntp_ctl(struct cpu_user_regs *regs, uint32_t *r, bool read) { struct vcpu *v = current; + s_time_t expires; if ( !ACCESS_ALLOWED(regs, EL0PTEN) ) return false; @@ -184,8 +183,9 @@ static bool vtimer_cntp_ctl(struct cpu_user_regs *regs, uint32_t *r, bool read) if ( v->arch.phys_timer.ctl & CNTx_CTL_ENABLE ) { - set_timer(&v->arch.phys_timer.timer, - v->arch.phys_timer.cval + v->domain->arch.phys_timer_base.offset); + expires = v->arch.phys_timer.cval > boot_count + ? ticks_to_ns(v->arch.phys_timer.cval - boot_count) : 0; + set_timer(&v->arch.phys_timer.timer, expires); } else stop_timer(&v->arch.phys_timer.timer); @@ -197,26 +197,27 @@ static bool vtimer_cntp_tval(struct cpu_user_regs *regs, uint32_t *r, bool read) { struct vcpu *v = current; - s_time_t now; + uint64_t cntpct; + s_time_t expires; if ( !ACCESS_ALLOWED(regs, EL0PTEN) ) return false; - now = NOW() - v->domain->arch.phys_timer_base.offset; + cntpct = get_cycles(); if ( read ) { - *r = (uint32_t)(ns_to_ticks(v->arch.phys_timer.cval - now) & 0xffffffffull); + *r = (uint32_t)((v->arch.phys_timer.cval - cntpct) & 0xffffffffull); } else { - v->arch.phys_timer.cval = now + ticks_to_ns(*r); + v->arch.phys_timer.cval = cntpct + *r; if ( v->arch.phys_timer.ctl & CNTx_CTL_ENABLE ) { v->arch.phys_timer.ctl &= ~CNTx_CTL_PENDING; - set_timer(&v->arch.phys_timer.timer, - v->arch.phys_timer.cval + - v->domain->arch.phys_timer_base.offset); + expires = v->arch.phys_timer.cval > boot_count + ? ticks_to_ns(v->arch.phys_timer.cval - boot_count) : 0; + set_timer(&v->arch.phys_timer.timer, expires); } } return true; @@ -226,23 +227,24 @@ static bool vtimer_cntp_cval(struct cpu_user_regs *regs, uint64_t *r, bool read) { struct vcpu *v = current; + s_time_t expires; if ( !ACCESS_ALLOWED(regs, EL0PTEN) ) return false; if ( read ) { - *r = ns_to_ticks(v->arch.phys_timer.cval); + *r = v->arch.phys_timer.cval; } else { - v->arch.phys_timer.cval = ticks_to_ns(*r); + v->arch.phys_timer.cval = *r; if ( v->arch.phys_timer.ctl & CNTx_CTL_ENABLE ) { v->arch.phys_timer.ctl &= ~CNTx_CTL_PENDING; - set_timer(&v->arch.phys_timer.timer, - v->arch.phys_timer.cval + - v->domain->arch.phys_timer_base.offset); + expires = v->arch.phys_timer.cval > boot_count + ? ticks_to_ns(v->arch.phys_timer.cval - boot_count) : 0; + set_timer(&v->arch.phys_timer.timer, expires); } } return true; diff --git a/xen/include/asm-arm/domain.h b/xen/include/asm-arm/domain.h index f3f3fb7d7f..adc7fe7210 100644 --- a/xen/include/asm-arm/domain.h +++ b/xen/include/asm-arm/domain.h @@ -65,9 +65,6 @@ struct arch_domain RELMEM_done, } relmem; - struct { - uint64_t offset; - } phys_timer_base; struct { uint64_t offset; } virt_timer_base; -- 2.17.1 _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 1/2] xen/arm: remove physical timer offset 2020-01-21 15:07 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 1/2] xen/arm: remove physical timer offset Jeff Kubascik @ 2020-01-23 12:32 ` Julien Grall 2020-01-24 21:43 ` Jeff Kubascik 0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread From: Julien Grall @ 2020-01-23 12:32 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jeff Kubascik, xen-devel Cc: Stewart Hildebrand, Stefano Stabellini, Volodymyr Babchuk Hi, On 21/01/2020 15:07, Jeff Kubascik wrote: > The physical timer traps apply an offset so that time starts at 0 for > the guest. However, this offset is not currently applied to the physical > counter. Per the ARMv8 Reference Manual (ARM DDI 0487E.a), section > D11.2.4 Timers, the "Offset" between the counter and timer should be > zero for a physical timer. This removes the offset to make the timer and > counter consistent. > > This also cleans up the physical timer implementation to better match > the virtual timer - both cval's now hold the hardware value. > > Signed-off-by: Jeff Kubascik <jeff.kubascik@dornerworks.com> > --- > xen/arch/arm/vtimer.c | 34 ++++++++++++++++++---------------- > xen/include/asm-arm/domain.h | 3 --- > 2 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/vtimer.c b/xen/arch/arm/vtimer.c > index 240a850b6e..0c78a65863 100644 > --- a/xen/arch/arm/vtimer.c > +++ b/xen/arch/arm/vtimer.c > @@ -62,7 +62,6 @@ static void virt_timer_expired(void *data) > > int domain_vtimer_init(struct domain *d, struct xen_arch_domainconfig *config) > { > - d->arch.phys_timer_base.offset = NOW(); > d->arch.virt_timer_base.offset = READ_SYSREG64(CNTPCT_EL0); > d->time_offset.seconds = ticks_to_ns(d->arch.virt_timer_base.offset - boot_count); > do_div(d->time_offset.seconds, 1000000000); > @@ -108,7 +107,6 @@ int vcpu_vtimer_init(struct vcpu *v) > > init_timer(&t->timer, phys_timer_expired, t, v->processor); > t->ctl = 0; > - t->cval = NOW(); > t->irq = d0 > ? timer_get_irq(TIMER_PHYS_NONSECURE_PPI) > : GUEST_TIMER_PHYS_NS_PPI; > @@ -167,6 +165,7 @@ void virt_timer_restore(struct vcpu *v) > static bool vtimer_cntp_ctl(struct cpu_user_regs *regs, uint32_t *r, bool read) > { > struct vcpu *v = current; > + s_time_t expires; > > if ( !ACCESS_ALLOWED(regs, EL0PTEN) ) > return false; > @@ -184,8 +183,9 @@ static bool vtimer_cntp_ctl(struct cpu_user_regs *regs, uint32_t *r, bool read) > > if ( v->arch.phys_timer.ctl & CNTx_CTL_ENABLE ) > { > - set_timer(&v->arch.phys_timer.timer, > - v->arch.phys_timer.cval + v->domain->arch.phys_timer_base.offset); > + expires = v->arch.phys_timer.cval > boot_count > + ? ticks_to_ns(v->arch.phys_timer.cval - boot_count) : 0; > + set_timer(&v->arch.phys_timer.timer, expires); While the factoring was optional, my request of a comment wasn't (even if it requires to duplicate 3 times). If you suggest a comment and an update of the commit message, I can merge it in this patch on commit. Cheers, -- Julien Grall _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 1/2] xen/arm: remove physical timer offset 2020-01-23 12:32 ` Julien Grall @ 2020-01-24 21:43 ` Jeff Kubascik 2020-01-24 21:58 ` Julien Grall 0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread From: Jeff Kubascik @ 2020-01-24 21:43 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Julien Grall, xen-devel Cc: Stewart Hildebrand, Stefano Stabellini, Volodymyr Babchuk On 1/23/2020 7:32 AM, Julien Grall wrote: > Hi, > > On 21/01/2020 15:07, Jeff Kubascik wrote: >> The physical timer traps apply an offset so that time starts at 0 for >> the guest. However, this offset is not currently applied to the physical >> counter. Per the ARMv8 Reference Manual (ARM DDI 0487E.a), section >> D11.2.4 Timers, the "Offset" between the counter and timer should be >> zero for a physical timer. This removes the offset to make the timer and >> counter consistent. >> >> This also cleans up the physical timer implementation to better match >> the virtual timer - both cval's now hold the hardware value. >> >> Signed-off-by: Jeff Kubascik <jeff.kubascik@dornerworks.com> >> --- >> xen/arch/arm/vtimer.c | 34 ++++++++++++++++++---------------- >> xen/include/asm-arm/domain.h | 3 --- >> 2 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/vtimer.c b/xen/arch/arm/vtimer.c >> index 240a850b6e..0c78a65863 100644 >> --- a/xen/arch/arm/vtimer.c >> +++ b/xen/arch/arm/vtimer.c >> @@ -62,7 +62,6 @@ static void virt_timer_expired(void *data) >> >> int domain_vtimer_init(struct domain *d, struct xen_arch_domainconfig *config) >> { >> - d->arch.phys_timer_base.offset = NOW(); >> d->arch.virt_timer_base.offset = READ_SYSREG64(CNTPCT_EL0); >> d->time_offset.seconds = ticks_to_ns(d->arch.virt_timer_base.offset - boot_count); >> do_div(d->time_offset.seconds, 1000000000); >> @@ -108,7 +107,6 @@ int vcpu_vtimer_init(struct vcpu *v) >> >> init_timer(&t->timer, phys_timer_expired, t, v->processor); >> t->ctl = 0; >> - t->cval = NOW(); >> t->irq = d0 >> ? timer_get_irq(TIMER_PHYS_NONSECURE_PPI) >> : GUEST_TIMER_PHYS_NS_PPI; >> @@ -167,6 +165,7 @@ void virt_timer_restore(struct vcpu *v) >> static bool vtimer_cntp_ctl(struct cpu_user_regs *regs, uint32_t *r, bool read) >> { >> struct vcpu *v = current; >> + s_time_t expires; >> >> if ( !ACCESS_ALLOWED(regs, EL0PTEN) ) >> return false; >> @@ -184,8 +183,9 @@ static bool vtimer_cntp_ctl(struct cpu_user_regs *regs, uint32_t *r, bool read) >> >> if ( v->arch.phys_timer.ctl & CNTx_CTL_ENABLE ) >> { >> - set_timer(&v->arch.phys_timer.timer, >> - v->arch.phys_timer.cval + v->domain->arch.phys_timer_base.offset); >> + expires = v->arch.phys_timer.cval > boot_count >> + ? ticks_to_ns(v->arch.phys_timer.cval - boot_count) : 0; >> + set_timer(&v->arch.phys_timer.timer, expires); > > While the factoring was optional, my request of a comment wasn't (even > if it requires to duplicate 3 times). Understood. > If you suggest a comment and an update of the commit message, I can > merge it in this patch on commit. For the comment: /* If cval is before the point Xen started, expire timer immediately */ For the commit message: In the case the guest sets cval to a time before Xen started, the correct behavior is to expire the timer immediately. To do this, we set the expires argument of set_timer to zero. > Cheers, > > -- > Julien Grall > Sincerely, Jeff Kubascik _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 1/2] xen/arm: remove physical timer offset 2020-01-24 21:43 ` Jeff Kubascik @ 2020-01-24 21:58 ` Julien Grall 0 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread From: Julien Grall @ 2020-01-24 21:58 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jeff Kubascik, xen-devel Cc: Stewart Hildebrand, Stefano Stabellini, Volodymyr Babchuk On 24/01/2020 21:43, Jeff Kubascik wrote: > On 1/23/2020 7:32 AM, Julien Grall wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On 21/01/2020 15:07, Jeff Kubascik wrote: >>> The physical timer traps apply an offset so that time starts at 0 for >>> the guest. However, this offset is not currently applied to the physical >>> counter. Per the ARMv8 Reference Manual (ARM DDI 0487E.a), section >>> D11.2.4 Timers, the "Offset" between the counter and timer should be >>> zero for a physical timer. This removes the offset to make the timer and >>> counter consistent. >>> >>> This also cleans up the physical timer implementation to better match >>> the virtual timer - both cval's now hold the hardware value. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Jeff Kubascik <jeff.kubascik@dornerworks.com> >>> --- >>> xen/arch/arm/vtimer.c | 34 ++++++++++++++++++---------------- >>> xen/include/asm-arm/domain.h | 3 --- >>> 2 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/vtimer.c b/xen/arch/arm/vtimer.c >>> index 240a850b6e..0c78a65863 100644 >>> --- a/xen/arch/arm/vtimer.c >>> +++ b/xen/arch/arm/vtimer.c >>> @@ -62,7 +62,6 @@ static void virt_timer_expired(void *data) >>> >>> int domain_vtimer_init(struct domain *d, struct xen_arch_domainconfig *config) >>> { >>> - d->arch.phys_timer_base.offset = NOW(); >>> d->arch.virt_timer_base.offset = READ_SYSREG64(CNTPCT_EL0); >>> d->time_offset.seconds = ticks_to_ns(d->arch.virt_timer_base.offset - boot_count); >>> do_div(d->time_offset.seconds, 1000000000); >>> @@ -108,7 +107,6 @@ int vcpu_vtimer_init(struct vcpu *v) >>> >>> init_timer(&t->timer, phys_timer_expired, t, v->processor); >>> t->ctl = 0; >>> - t->cval = NOW(); >>> t->irq = d0 >>> ? timer_get_irq(TIMER_PHYS_NONSECURE_PPI) >>> : GUEST_TIMER_PHYS_NS_PPI; >>> @@ -167,6 +165,7 @@ void virt_timer_restore(struct vcpu *v) >>> static bool vtimer_cntp_ctl(struct cpu_user_regs *regs, uint32_t *r, bool read) >>> { >>> struct vcpu *v = current; >>> + s_time_t expires; >>> >>> if ( !ACCESS_ALLOWED(regs, EL0PTEN) ) >>> return false; >>> @@ -184,8 +183,9 @@ static bool vtimer_cntp_ctl(struct cpu_user_regs *regs, uint32_t *r, bool read) >>> >>> if ( v->arch.phys_timer.ctl & CNTx_CTL_ENABLE ) >>> { >>> - set_timer(&v->arch.phys_timer.timer, >>> - v->arch.phys_timer.cval + v->domain->arch.phys_timer_base.offset); >>> + expires = v->arch.phys_timer.cval > boot_count >>> + ? ticks_to_ns(v->arch.phys_timer.cval - boot_count) : 0; >>> + set_timer(&v->arch.phys_timer.timer, expires); >> >> While the factoring was optional, my request of a comment wasn't (even >> if it requires to duplicate 3 times). > > Understood. > >> If you suggest a comment and an update of the commit message, I can >> merge it in this patch on commit. > > For the comment: > > /* If cval is before the point Xen started, expire timer immediately */ > > For the commit message: > > In the case the guest sets cval to a time before Xen started, the correct > behavior is to expire the timer immediately. To do this, we set the expires > argument of set_timer to zero. It looks good to me, I will commit the series on Monday. Thanks! Cheers, -- Julien Grall _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 2/2] xen/arm: Sign extend TimerValue when computing the CompareValue 2020-01-21 15:07 [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 0/2] xen/arm: physical timer improvements Jeff Kubascik 2020-01-21 15:07 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 1/2] xen/arm: remove physical timer offset Jeff Kubascik @ 2020-01-21 15:07 ` Jeff Kubascik 2020-01-23 12:29 ` Julien Grall 1 sibling, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread From: Jeff Kubascik @ 2020-01-21 15:07 UTC (permalink / raw) To: xen-devel Cc: Stewart Hildebrand, Volodymyr Babchuk, Stefano Stabellini, Julien Grall Xen will only store the CompareValue as it can be derived from the TimerValue (ARM DDI 0487E.a section D11.2.4): CompareValue = (Counter[63:0] + SignExtend(TimerValue))[63:0] While the TimerValue is a 32-bit signed value, our implementation assumed it is a 32-bit unsigned value. Signed-off-by: Jeff Kubascik <jeff.kubascik@dornerworks.com> --- xen/arch/arm/vtimer.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/vtimer.c b/xen/arch/arm/vtimer.c index 0c78a65863..fed89498a9 100644 --- a/xen/arch/arm/vtimer.c +++ b/xen/arch/arm/vtimer.c @@ -211,7 +211,7 @@ static bool vtimer_cntp_tval(struct cpu_user_regs *regs, uint32_t *r, } else { - v->arch.phys_timer.cval = cntpct + *r; + v->arch.phys_timer.cval = cntpct + (uint64_t)(int32_t)*r; if ( v->arch.phys_timer.ctl & CNTx_CTL_ENABLE ) { v->arch.phys_timer.ctl &= ~CNTx_CTL_PENDING; -- 2.17.1 _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 2/2] xen/arm: Sign extend TimerValue when computing the CompareValue 2020-01-21 15:07 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 2/2] xen/arm: Sign extend TimerValue when computing the CompareValue Jeff Kubascik @ 2020-01-23 12:29 ` Julien Grall 0 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread From: Julien Grall @ 2020-01-23 12:29 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jeff Kubascik, xen-devel Cc: Stewart Hildebrand, Stefano Stabellini, Volodymyr Babchuk Hi, On 21/01/2020 15:07, Jeff Kubascik wrote: > Xen will only store the CompareValue as it can be derived from the > TimerValue (ARM DDI 0487E.a section D11.2.4): > > CompareValue = (Counter[63:0] + SignExtend(TimerValue))[63:0] > > While the TimerValue is a 32-bit signed value, our implementation > assumed it is a 32-bit unsigned value. > > Signed-off-by: Jeff Kubascik <jeff.kubascik@dornerworks.com> Acked-by: Julien Grall <julien@xen.org> Cheers, -- Julien Grall _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2020-01-24 21:58 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 7+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2020-01-21 15:07 [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 0/2] xen/arm: physical timer improvements Jeff Kubascik 2020-01-21 15:07 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 1/2] xen/arm: remove physical timer offset Jeff Kubascik 2020-01-23 12:32 ` Julien Grall 2020-01-24 21:43 ` Jeff Kubascik 2020-01-24 21:58 ` Julien Grall 2020-01-21 15:07 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 2/2] xen/arm: Sign extend TimerValue when computing the CompareValue Jeff Kubascik 2020-01-23 12:29 ` Julien Grall
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.