From: Reiji Watanabe <reijiw@google.com> To: Oliver Upton <oupton@google.com> Cc: kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, Alexandru Elisei <alexandru.elisei@arm.com>, Anup Patel <anup@brainfault.org>, Atish Patra <atishp@atishpatra.org>, James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>, Jing Zhang <jingzhangos@google.com>, Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>, Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>, kvm-riscv@lists.infradead.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>, Peter Shier <pshier@google.com>, Raghavendra Rao Ananta <rananta@google.com>, Ricardo Koller <ricarkol@google.com>, Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>, Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>, Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>, Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@tencent.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 07/13] KVM: arm64: Add support for userspace to suspend a vCPU Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2022 20:12:31 -0700 [thread overview] Message-ID: <CAAeT=FzURZmYfsLJnWMXufBiaZ6Wypan+xK4WxOSM=p=kEnYxA@mail.gmail.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20220409184549.1681189-8-oupton@google.com> Hi Oliver, On Sat, Apr 9, 2022 at 11:46 AM Oliver Upton <oupton@google.com> wrote: > > Introduce a new MP state, KVM_MP_STATE_SUSPENDED, which indicates a vCPU > is in a suspended state. In the suspended state the vCPU will block > until a wakeup event (pending interrupt) is recognized. > > Add a new system event type, KVM_SYSTEM_EVENT_WAKEUP, to indicate to > userspace that KVM has recognized one such wakeup event. It is the > responsibility of userspace to then make the vCPU runnable, or leave it > suspended until the next wakeup event. > > Signed-off-by: Oliver Upton <oupton@google.com> > --- > Documentation/virt/kvm/api.rst | 37 +++++++++++++++++++++-- > arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h | 1 + > arch/arm64/kvm/arm.c | 49 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > include/uapi/linux/kvm.h | 2 ++ > 4 files changed, 87 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/Documentation/virt/kvm/api.rst b/Documentation/virt/kvm/api.rst > index d13fa6600467..d104e34ad703 100644 > --- a/Documentation/virt/kvm/api.rst > +++ b/Documentation/virt/kvm/api.rst > @@ -1476,14 +1476,43 @@ Possible values are: > [s390] > KVM_MP_STATE_LOAD the vcpu is in a special load/startup state > [s390] > + KVM_MP_STATE_SUSPENDED the vcpu is in a suspend state and is waiting > + for a wakeup event [arm64] > ========================== =============================================== > > On x86, this ioctl is only useful after KVM_CREATE_IRQCHIP. Without an > in-kernel irqchip, the multiprocessing state must be maintained by userspace on > these architectures. > > -For arm64/riscv: > -^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > +For arm64: > +^^^^^^^^^^ > + > +If a vCPU is in the KVM_MP_STATE_SUSPENDED state, KVM will emulate the > +architectural execution of a WFI instruction. > + > +If a wakeup event is recognized, KVM will exit to userspace with a > +KVM_SYSTEM_EVENT exit, where the event type is KVM_SYSTEM_EVENT_WAKEUP. If > +userspace wants to honor the wakeup, it must set the vCPU's MP state to > +KVM_MP_STATE_RUNNABLE. If it does not, KVM will continue to await a wakeup > +event in subsequent calls to KVM_RUN. > + > +.. warning:: > + > + If userspace intends to keep the vCPU in a SUSPENDED state, it is > + strongly recommended that userspace take action to suppress the > + wakeup event (such as masking an interrupt). Otherwise, subsequent > + calls to KVM_RUN will immediately exit with a KVM_SYSTEM_EVENT_WAKEUP > + event and inadvertently waste CPU cycles. > + > + Additionally, if userspace takes action to suppress a wakeup event, > + it is strongly recommended that it also restores the vCPU to its > + original state when the vCPU is made RUNNABLE again. For example, > + if userspace masked a pending interrupt to suppress the wakeup, > + the interrupt should be unmasked before returning control to the > + guest. > + > +For riscv: > +^^^^^^^^^^ > > The only states that are valid are KVM_MP_STATE_STOPPED and > KVM_MP_STATE_RUNNABLE which reflect if the vcpu is paused or not. > @@ -5985,6 +6014,7 @@ should put the acknowledged interrupt vector into the 'epr' field. > #define KVM_SYSTEM_EVENT_SHUTDOWN 1 > #define KVM_SYSTEM_EVENT_RESET 2 > #define KVM_SYSTEM_EVENT_CRASH 3 > + #define KVM_SYSTEM_EVENT_WAKEUP 4 > __u32 type; > __u64 flags; > } system_event; > @@ -6009,6 +6039,9 @@ Valid values for 'type' are: > has requested a crash condition maintenance. Userspace can choose > to ignore the request, or to gather VM memory core dump and/or > reset/shutdown of the VM. > + - KVM_SYSTEM_EVENT_WAKEUP -- the exiting vCPU is in a suspended state and > + KVM has recognized a wakeup event. Userspace may honor this event by > + marking the exiting vCPU as runnable, or deny it and call KVM_RUN again. > > Valid flags are: > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h > index f3f93d48e21a..46027b9b80ca 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h > +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h > @@ -46,6 +46,7 @@ > #define KVM_REQ_RECORD_STEAL KVM_ARCH_REQ(3) > #define KVM_REQ_RELOAD_GICv4 KVM_ARCH_REQ(4) > #define KVM_REQ_RELOAD_PMU KVM_ARCH_REQ(5) > +#define KVM_REQ_SUSPEND KVM_ARCH_REQ(6) > > #define KVM_DIRTY_LOG_MANUAL_CAPS (KVM_DIRTY_LOG_MANUAL_PROTECT_ENABLE | \ > KVM_DIRTY_LOG_INITIALLY_SET) > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/arm.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/arm.c > index efe54aba5cce..e9641b86d375 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/arm.c > +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/arm.c > @@ -444,6 +444,18 @@ bool kvm_arm_vcpu_stopped(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > return vcpu->arch.mp_state.mp_state == KVM_MP_STATE_STOPPED; > } > > +static void kvm_arm_vcpu_suspend(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > +{ > + vcpu->arch.mp_state.mp_state = KVM_MP_STATE_SUSPENDED; > + kvm_make_request(KVM_REQ_SUSPEND, vcpu); > + kvm_vcpu_kick(vcpu); > +static void kvm_arm_vcpu_suspend(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > +{ > + vcpu->arch.mp_state.mp_state = KVM_MP_STATE_SUSPENDED; > + kvm_make_request(KVM_REQ_SUSPEND, vcpu); > + kvm_vcpu_kick(vcpu); Considering the patch 8 will remove the call to kvm_vcpu_kick() (BTW, I wonder why you wanted to make that change in the patch-8 instead of the patch-7), it looks like we could use the mp_state KVM_MP_STATE_SUSPENDED instead of using KVM_REQ_SUSPEND. What is the reason why you prefer to introduce KVM_REQ_SUSPEND rather than simply using KVM_MP_STATE_SUSPENDED ? Thanks, Reiji > +} > + > +static bool kvm_arm_vcpu_suspended(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > +{ > + return vcpu->arch.mp_state.mp_state == KVM_MP_STATE_SUSPENDED; > +} > + > int kvm_arch_vcpu_ioctl_get_mpstate(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, > struct kvm_mp_state *mp_state) > { > @@ -464,6 +476,9 @@ int kvm_arch_vcpu_ioctl_set_mpstate(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, > case KVM_MP_STATE_STOPPED: > kvm_arm_vcpu_power_off(vcpu); > break; > + case KVM_MP_STATE_SUSPENDED: > + kvm_arm_vcpu_suspend(vcpu); > + break; > default: > ret = -EINVAL; > } > @@ -648,6 +663,37 @@ void kvm_vcpu_wfi(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > preempt_enable(); > } > > +static int kvm_vcpu_suspend(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > +{ > + if (!kvm_arm_vcpu_suspended(vcpu)) > + return 1; > + > + kvm_vcpu_wfi(vcpu); > + > + /* > + * The suspend state is sticky; we do not leave it until userspace > + * explicitly marks the vCPU as runnable. Request that we suspend again > + * later. > + */ > + kvm_make_request(KVM_REQ_SUSPEND, vcpu); > + > + /* > + * Check to make sure the vCPU is actually runnable. If so, exit to > + * userspace informing it of the wakeup condition. > + */ > + if (kvm_arch_vcpu_runnable(vcpu)) { > + kvm_vcpu_set_system_event_exit(vcpu, KVM_SYSTEM_EVENT_WAKEUP, 0); > + return 0; > + } > + > + /* > + * Otherwise, we were unblocked to process a different event, such as a > + * pending signal. Return 1 and allow kvm_arch_vcpu_ioctl_run() to > + * process the event. > + */ > + return 1; > +} > + > /** > * check_vcpu_requests - check and handle pending vCPU requests > * @vcpu: the VCPU pointer > @@ -686,6 +732,9 @@ static int check_vcpu_requests(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > if (kvm_check_request(KVM_REQ_RELOAD_PMU, vcpu)) > kvm_pmu_handle_pmcr(vcpu, > __vcpu_sys_reg(vcpu, PMCR_EL0)); > + > + if (kvm_check_request(KVM_REQ_SUSPEND, vcpu)) > + return kvm_vcpu_suspend(vcpu); > } > > return 1; > diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/kvm.h b/include/uapi/linux/kvm.h > index 91a6fe4e02c0..64e5f9d83a7a 100644 > --- a/include/uapi/linux/kvm.h > +++ b/include/uapi/linux/kvm.h > @@ -444,6 +444,7 @@ struct kvm_run { > #define KVM_SYSTEM_EVENT_SHUTDOWN 1 > #define KVM_SYSTEM_EVENT_RESET 2 > #define KVM_SYSTEM_EVENT_CRASH 3 > +#define KVM_SYSTEM_EVENT_WAKEUP 4 > __u32 type; > __u64 flags; > } system_event; > @@ -640,6 +641,7 @@ struct kvm_vapic_addr { > #define KVM_MP_STATE_OPERATING 7 > #define KVM_MP_STATE_LOAD 8 > #define KVM_MP_STATE_AP_RESET_HOLD 9 > +#define KVM_MP_STATE_SUSPENDED 10 > > struct kvm_mp_state { > __u32 mp_state; > -- > 2.35.1.1178.g4f1659d476-goog >
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Reiji Watanabe <reijiw@google.com> To: Oliver Upton <oupton@google.com> Cc: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>, Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@tencent.com>, kvm@vger.kernel.org, Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>, Peter Shier <pshier@google.com>, kvm-riscv@lists.infradead.org, Atish Patra <atishp@atishpatra.org>, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>, Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>, kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 07/13] KVM: arm64: Add support for userspace to suspend a vCPU Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2022 20:12:31 -0700 [thread overview] Message-ID: <CAAeT=FzURZmYfsLJnWMXufBiaZ6Wypan+xK4WxOSM=p=kEnYxA@mail.gmail.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20220409184549.1681189-8-oupton@google.com> Hi Oliver, On Sat, Apr 9, 2022 at 11:46 AM Oliver Upton <oupton@google.com> wrote: > > Introduce a new MP state, KVM_MP_STATE_SUSPENDED, which indicates a vCPU > is in a suspended state. In the suspended state the vCPU will block > until a wakeup event (pending interrupt) is recognized. > > Add a new system event type, KVM_SYSTEM_EVENT_WAKEUP, to indicate to > userspace that KVM has recognized one such wakeup event. It is the > responsibility of userspace to then make the vCPU runnable, or leave it > suspended until the next wakeup event. > > Signed-off-by: Oliver Upton <oupton@google.com> > --- > Documentation/virt/kvm/api.rst | 37 +++++++++++++++++++++-- > arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h | 1 + > arch/arm64/kvm/arm.c | 49 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > include/uapi/linux/kvm.h | 2 ++ > 4 files changed, 87 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/Documentation/virt/kvm/api.rst b/Documentation/virt/kvm/api.rst > index d13fa6600467..d104e34ad703 100644 > --- a/Documentation/virt/kvm/api.rst > +++ b/Documentation/virt/kvm/api.rst > @@ -1476,14 +1476,43 @@ Possible values are: > [s390] > KVM_MP_STATE_LOAD the vcpu is in a special load/startup state > [s390] > + KVM_MP_STATE_SUSPENDED the vcpu is in a suspend state and is waiting > + for a wakeup event [arm64] > ========================== =============================================== > > On x86, this ioctl is only useful after KVM_CREATE_IRQCHIP. Without an > in-kernel irqchip, the multiprocessing state must be maintained by userspace on > these architectures. > > -For arm64/riscv: > -^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > +For arm64: > +^^^^^^^^^^ > + > +If a vCPU is in the KVM_MP_STATE_SUSPENDED state, KVM will emulate the > +architectural execution of a WFI instruction. > + > +If a wakeup event is recognized, KVM will exit to userspace with a > +KVM_SYSTEM_EVENT exit, where the event type is KVM_SYSTEM_EVENT_WAKEUP. If > +userspace wants to honor the wakeup, it must set the vCPU's MP state to > +KVM_MP_STATE_RUNNABLE. If it does not, KVM will continue to await a wakeup > +event in subsequent calls to KVM_RUN. > + > +.. warning:: > + > + If userspace intends to keep the vCPU in a SUSPENDED state, it is > + strongly recommended that userspace take action to suppress the > + wakeup event (such as masking an interrupt). Otherwise, subsequent > + calls to KVM_RUN will immediately exit with a KVM_SYSTEM_EVENT_WAKEUP > + event and inadvertently waste CPU cycles. > + > + Additionally, if userspace takes action to suppress a wakeup event, > + it is strongly recommended that it also restores the vCPU to its > + original state when the vCPU is made RUNNABLE again. For example, > + if userspace masked a pending interrupt to suppress the wakeup, > + the interrupt should be unmasked before returning control to the > + guest. > + > +For riscv: > +^^^^^^^^^^ > > The only states that are valid are KVM_MP_STATE_STOPPED and > KVM_MP_STATE_RUNNABLE which reflect if the vcpu is paused or not. > @@ -5985,6 +6014,7 @@ should put the acknowledged interrupt vector into the 'epr' field. > #define KVM_SYSTEM_EVENT_SHUTDOWN 1 > #define KVM_SYSTEM_EVENT_RESET 2 > #define KVM_SYSTEM_EVENT_CRASH 3 > + #define KVM_SYSTEM_EVENT_WAKEUP 4 > __u32 type; > __u64 flags; > } system_event; > @@ -6009,6 +6039,9 @@ Valid values for 'type' are: > has requested a crash condition maintenance. Userspace can choose > to ignore the request, or to gather VM memory core dump and/or > reset/shutdown of the VM. > + - KVM_SYSTEM_EVENT_WAKEUP -- the exiting vCPU is in a suspended state and > + KVM has recognized a wakeup event. Userspace may honor this event by > + marking the exiting vCPU as runnable, or deny it and call KVM_RUN again. > > Valid flags are: > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h > index f3f93d48e21a..46027b9b80ca 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h > +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h > @@ -46,6 +46,7 @@ > #define KVM_REQ_RECORD_STEAL KVM_ARCH_REQ(3) > #define KVM_REQ_RELOAD_GICv4 KVM_ARCH_REQ(4) > #define KVM_REQ_RELOAD_PMU KVM_ARCH_REQ(5) > +#define KVM_REQ_SUSPEND KVM_ARCH_REQ(6) > > #define KVM_DIRTY_LOG_MANUAL_CAPS (KVM_DIRTY_LOG_MANUAL_PROTECT_ENABLE | \ > KVM_DIRTY_LOG_INITIALLY_SET) > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/arm.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/arm.c > index efe54aba5cce..e9641b86d375 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/arm.c > +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/arm.c > @@ -444,6 +444,18 @@ bool kvm_arm_vcpu_stopped(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > return vcpu->arch.mp_state.mp_state == KVM_MP_STATE_STOPPED; > } > > +static void kvm_arm_vcpu_suspend(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > +{ > + vcpu->arch.mp_state.mp_state = KVM_MP_STATE_SUSPENDED; > + kvm_make_request(KVM_REQ_SUSPEND, vcpu); > + kvm_vcpu_kick(vcpu); > +static void kvm_arm_vcpu_suspend(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > +{ > + vcpu->arch.mp_state.mp_state = KVM_MP_STATE_SUSPENDED; > + kvm_make_request(KVM_REQ_SUSPEND, vcpu); > + kvm_vcpu_kick(vcpu); Considering the patch 8 will remove the call to kvm_vcpu_kick() (BTW, I wonder why you wanted to make that change in the patch-8 instead of the patch-7), it looks like we could use the mp_state KVM_MP_STATE_SUSPENDED instead of using KVM_REQ_SUSPEND. What is the reason why you prefer to introduce KVM_REQ_SUSPEND rather than simply using KVM_MP_STATE_SUSPENDED ? Thanks, Reiji > +} > + > +static bool kvm_arm_vcpu_suspended(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > +{ > + return vcpu->arch.mp_state.mp_state == KVM_MP_STATE_SUSPENDED; > +} > + > int kvm_arch_vcpu_ioctl_get_mpstate(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, > struct kvm_mp_state *mp_state) > { > @@ -464,6 +476,9 @@ int kvm_arch_vcpu_ioctl_set_mpstate(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, > case KVM_MP_STATE_STOPPED: > kvm_arm_vcpu_power_off(vcpu); > break; > + case KVM_MP_STATE_SUSPENDED: > + kvm_arm_vcpu_suspend(vcpu); > + break; > default: > ret = -EINVAL; > } > @@ -648,6 +663,37 @@ void kvm_vcpu_wfi(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > preempt_enable(); > } > > +static int kvm_vcpu_suspend(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > +{ > + if (!kvm_arm_vcpu_suspended(vcpu)) > + return 1; > + > + kvm_vcpu_wfi(vcpu); > + > + /* > + * The suspend state is sticky; we do not leave it until userspace > + * explicitly marks the vCPU as runnable. Request that we suspend again > + * later. > + */ > + kvm_make_request(KVM_REQ_SUSPEND, vcpu); > + > + /* > + * Check to make sure the vCPU is actually runnable. If so, exit to > + * userspace informing it of the wakeup condition. > + */ > + if (kvm_arch_vcpu_runnable(vcpu)) { > + kvm_vcpu_set_system_event_exit(vcpu, KVM_SYSTEM_EVENT_WAKEUP, 0); > + return 0; > + } > + > + /* > + * Otherwise, we were unblocked to process a different event, such as a > + * pending signal. Return 1 and allow kvm_arch_vcpu_ioctl_run() to > + * process the event. > + */ > + return 1; > +} > + > /** > * check_vcpu_requests - check and handle pending vCPU requests > * @vcpu: the VCPU pointer > @@ -686,6 +732,9 @@ static int check_vcpu_requests(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > if (kvm_check_request(KVM_REQ_RELOAD_PMU, vcpu)) > kvm_pmu_handle_pmcr(vcpu, > __vcpu_sys_reg(vcpu, PMCR_EL0)); > + > + if (kvm_check_request(KVM_REQ_SUSPEND, vcpu)) > + return kvm_vcpu_suspend(vcpu); > } > > return 1; > diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/kvm.h b/include/uapi/linux/kvm.h > index 91a6fe4e02c0..64e5f9d83a7a 100644 > --- a/include/uapi/linux/kvm.h > +++ b/include/uapi/linux/kvm.h > @@ -444,6 +444,7 @@ struct kvm_run { > #define KVM_SYSTEM_EVENT_SHUTDOWN 1 > #define KVM_SYSTEM_EVENT_RESET 2 > #define KVM_SYSTEM_EVENT_CRASH 3 > +#define KVM_SYSTEM_EVENT_WAKEUP 4 > __u32 type; > __u64 flags; > } system_event; > @@ -640,6 +641,7 @@ struct kvm_vapic_addr { > #define KVM_MP_STATE_OPERATING 7 > #define KVM_MP_STATE_LOAD 8 > #define KVM_MP_STATE_AP_RESET_HOLD 9 > +#define KVM_MP_STATE_SUSPENDED 10 > > struct kvm_mp_state { > __u32 mp_state; > -- > 2.35.1.1178.g4f1659d476-goog > _______________________________________________ kvmarm mailing list kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-04-21 3:12 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 48+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2022-04-09 18:45 [PATCH v5 00/13] KVM: arm64: PSCI SYSTEM_SUSPEND support Oliver Upton 2022-04-09 18:45 ` Oliver Upton 2022-04-09 18:45 ` [PATCH v5 01/13] KVM: arm64: Don't depend on fallthrough to hide SYSTEM_RESET2 Oliver Upton 2022-04-09 18:45 ` Oliver Upton 2022-04-14 5:00 ` Reiji Watanabe 2022-04-14 5:00 ` Reiji Watanabe 2022-04-09 18:45 ` [PATCH v5 02/13] KVM: arm64: Dedupe vCPU power off helpers Oliver Upton 2022-04-09 18:45 ` Oliver Upton 2022-04-09 18:45 ` [PATCH v5 03/13] KVM: arm64: Track vCPU power state using MP state values Oliver Upton 2022-04-09 18:45 ` Oliver Upton 2022-04-14 5:26 ` Reiji Watanabe 2022-04-14 5:26 ` Reiji Watanabe 2022-04-21 3:31 ` Oliver Upton 2022-04-21 3:31 ` Oliver Upton 2022-04-09 18:45 ` [PATCH v5 04/13] KVM: arm64: Rename the KVM_REQ_SLEEP handler Oliver Upton 2022-04-09 18:45 ` Oliver Upton 2022-04-09 18:45 ` [PATCH v5 05/13] KVM: Create helper for setting a system event exit Oliver Upton 2022-04-09 18:45 ` Oliver Upton 2022-04-14 5:40 ` Reiji Watanabe 2022-04-14 5:40 ` Reiji Watanabe 2022-04-09 18:45 ` [PATCH v5 06/13] KVM: arm64: Return a value from check_vcpu_requests() Oliver Upton 2022-04-09 18:45 ` Oliver Upton 2022-04-22 6:37 ` Reiji Watanabe 2022-04-22 6:37 ` Reiji Watanabe 2022-04-09 18:45 ` [PATCH v5 07/13] KVM: arm64: Add support for userspace to suspend a vCPU Oliver Upton 2022-04-09 18:45 ` Oliver Upton 2022-04-21 3:12 ` Reiji Watanabe [this message] 2022-04-21 3:12 ` Reiji Watanabe 2022-04-21 3:23 ` Oliver Upton 2022-04-21 3:23 ` Oliver Upton 2022-04-22 6:28 ` Reiji Watanabe 2022-04-22 6:28 ` Reiji Watanabe 2022-04-29 3:42 ` Oliver Upton 2022-04-29 3:42 ` Oliver Upton 2022-04-09 18:45 ` [PATCH v5 08/13] KVM: arm64: Implement PSCI SYSTEM_SUSPEND Oliver Upton 2022-04-09 18:45 ` Oliver Upton 2022-04-22 7:02 ` Reiji Watanabe 2022-04-22 7:02 ` Reiji Watanabe 2022-04-09 18:45 ` [PATCH v5 09/13] selftests: KVM: Rename psci_cpu_on_test to psci_test Oliver Upton 2022-04-09 18:45 ` Oliver Upton 2022-04-09 18:45 ` [PATCH v5 10/13] selftests: KVM: Create helper for making SMCCC calls Oliver Upton 2022-04-09 18:45 ` Oliver Upton 2022-04-09 18:45 ` [PATCH v5 11/13] selftests: KVM: Use KVM_SET_MP_STATE to power off vCPU in psci_test Oliver Upton 2022-04-09 18:45 ` Oliver Upton 2022-04-09 18:45 ` [PATCH v5 12/13] selftests: KVM: Refactor psci_test to make it amenable to new tests Oliver Upton 2022-04-09 18:45 ` Oliver Upton 2022-04-09 18:45 ` [PATCH v5 13/13] selftests: KVM: Test SYSTEM_SUSPEND PSCI call Oliver Upton 2022-04-09 18:45 ` Oliver Upton
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='CAAeT=FzURZmYfsLJnWMXufBiaZ6Wypan+xK4WxOSM=p=kEnYxA@mail.gmail.com' \ --to=reijiw@google.com \ --cc=alexandru.elisei@arm.com \ --cc=anup@brainfault.org \ --cc=atishp@atishpatra.org \ --cc=james.morse@arm.com \ --cc=jingzhangos@google.com \ --cc=jmattson@google.com \ --cc=joro@8bytes.org \ --cc=kvm-riscv@lists.infradead.org \ --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu \ --cc=maz@kernel.org \ --cc=oupton@google.com \ --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \ --cc=pshier@google.com \ --cc=rananta@google.com \ --cc=ricarkol@google.com \ --cc=seanjc@google.com \ --cc=suzuki.poulose@arm.com \ --cc=vkuznets@redhat.com \ --cc=wanpengli@tencent.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: linkBe 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.