* force push to kvm/next coming
@ 2020-01-24 8:38 Paolo Bonzini
2020-01-25 8:29 ` Christian Borntraeger
0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Paolo Bonzini @ 2020-01-24 8:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: KVM list
Linux-next merge reported some bad mistakes on my part, so I'm
force-pushing kvm/next. Since it was pushed only yesterday and the code
is the same except for two changed lines, it shouldn't be a big deal.
Paolo
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: force push to kvm/next coming
2020-01-24 8:38 force push to kvm/next coming Paolo Bonzini
@ 2020-01-25 8:29 ` Christian Borntraeger
2020-01-25 9:31 ` Paolo Bonzini
0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Christian Borntraeger @ 2020-01-25 8:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Paolo Bonzini, KVM list, Sean Christopherson
On 24.01.20 09:38, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Linux-next merge reported some bad mistakes on my part, so I'm
> force-pushing kvm/next. Since it was pushed only yesterday and the code
> is the same except for two changed lines, it shouldn't be a big deal.
>
> Paolo
>
current KVM/next has the following compile error (due to Seans rework).
CC [M] arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.o
arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c: In function ‘kvm_arch_vcpu_create’:
arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c:3026:32: error: ‘id’ undeclared (first use in this function); did you mean ‘fd’?
3026 | vcpu->arch.sie_block->icpua = id;
| ^~
| fd
arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c:3026:32: note: each undeclared identifier is reported only once for each function it appears in
arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c:3028:39: error: ‘kvm’ undeclared (first use in this function)
3028 | vcpu->arch.sie_block->gd = (u32)(u64)kvm->arch.gisa_int.origin;
| ^~~
make[2]: *** [scripts/Makefile.build:266: arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.o] Error 1
make[1]: *** [scripts/Makefile.build:503: arch/s390/kvm] Error 2
make: *** [Makefile:1693: arch/s390] Error 2
Is this part of the fixup that you will do or another issue?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: force push to kvm/next coming
2020-01-25 8:29 ` Christian Borntraeger
@ 2020-01-25 9:31 ` Paolo Bonzini
2020-01-25 11:31 ` Christian Borntraeger
` (3 more replies)
0 siblings, 4 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Paolo Bonzini @ 2020-01-25 9:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Christian Borntraeger, KVM list, Sean Christopherson
On 25/01/20 09:29, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
>
>
> On 24.01.20 09:38, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> Linux-next merge reported some bad mistakes on my part, so I'm
>> force-pushing kvm/next. Since it was pushed only yesterday and the code
>> is the same except for two changed lines, it shouldn't be a big deal.
>>
>> Paolo
>>
> current KVM/next has the following compile error (due to Seans rework).
>
> CC [M] arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.o
> arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c: In function ‘kvm_arch_vcpu_create’:
> arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c:3026:32: error: ‘id’ undeclared (first use in this function); did you mean ‘fd’?
> 3026 | vcpu->arch.sie_block->icpua = id;
> | ^~
> | fd
> arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c:3026:32: note: each undeclared identifier is reported only once for each function it appears in
> arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c:3028:39: error: ‘kvm’ undeclared (first use in this function)
> 3028 | vcpu->arch.sie_block->gd = (u32)(u64)kvm->arch.gisa_int.origin;
> | ^~~
> make[2]: *** [scripts/Makefile.build:266: arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.o] Error 1
> make[1]: *** [scripts/Makefile.build:503: arch/s390/kvm] Error 2
> make: *** [Makefile:1693: arch/s390] Error 2
>
> Is this part of the fixup that you will do or another issue?
Nope, I trusted Conny's review on that. :(
Is this enough?
diff --git a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
index c059b86aacd4..0f475af84c0a 100644
--- a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
+++ b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
@@ -3023,9 +3023,9 @@ int kvm_arch_vcpu_create(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
vcpu->arch.sie_block->mso = 0;
vcpu->arch.sie_block->msl = sclp.hamax;
- vcpu->arch.sie_block->icpua = id;
+ vcpu->arch.sie_block->icpua = vcpu->vcpu_id;
spin_lock_init(&vcpu->arch.local_int.lock);
- vcpu->arch.sie_block->gd = (u32)(u64)kvm->arch.gisa_int.origin;
+ vcpu->arch.sie_block->gd = (u32)(u64)vcpu->kvm->arch.gisa_int.origin;
if (vcpu->arch.sie_block->gd && sclp.has_gisaf)
vcpu->arch.sie_block->gd |= GISA_FORMAT1;
seqcount_init(&vcpu->arch.cputm_seqcount);
@@ -3061,9 +3061,9 @@ int kvm_arch_vcpu_create(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
goto out_free_sie_block;
}
- VM_EVENT(kvm, 3, "create cpu %d at 0x%pK, sie block at 0x%pK", id, vcpu,
+ VM_EVENT(kvm, 3, "create cpu %d at 0x%pK, sie block at 0x%pK", vcpu->vcpu_id, vcpu,
vcpu->arch.sie_block);
- trace_kvm_s390_create_vcpu(id, vcpu, vcpu->arch.sie_block);
+ trace_kvm_s390_create_vcpu(vcpu->vcpu_id, vcpu, vcpu->arch.sie_block);
rc = kvm_s390_vcpu_setup(vcpu);
if (rc)
Paolo
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: force push to kvm/next coming
2020-01-25 9:31 ` Paolo Bonzini
@ 2020-01-25 11:31 ` Christian Borntraeger
2020-01-26 7:28 ` Christian Borntraeger
2020-01-25 11:33 ` Christian Borntraeger
` (2 subsequent siblings)
3 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Christian Borntraeger @ 2020-01-25 11:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Paolo Bonzini, KVM list, Sean Christopherson
On 25.01.20 10:31, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 25/01/20 09:29, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 24.01.20 09:38, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>>> Linux-next merge reported some bad mistakes on my part, so I'm
>>> force-pushing kvm/next. Since it was pushed only yesterday and the code
>>> is the same except for two changed lines, it shouldn't be a big deal.
>>>
>>> Paolo
>>>
>> current KVM/next has the following compile error (due to Seans rework).
>>
>> CC [M] arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.o
>> arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c: In function ‘kvm_arch_vcpu_create’:
>> arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c:3026:32: error: ‘id’ undeclared (first use in this function); did you mean ‘fd’?
>> 3026 | vcpu->arch.sie_block->icpua = id;
>> | ^~
>> | fd
>> arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c:3026:32: note: each undeclared identifier is reported only once for each function it appears in
>> arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c:3028:39: error: ‘kvm’ undeclared (first use in this function)
>> 3028 | vcpu->arch.sie_block->gd = (u32)(u64)kvm->arch.gisa_int.origin;
>> | ^~~
>> make[2]: *** [scripts/Makefile.build:266: arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.o] Error 1
>> make[1]: *** [scripts/Makefile.build:503: arch/s390/kvm] Error 2
>> make: *** [Makefile:1693: arch/s390] Error 2
>>
>> Is this part of the fixup that you will do or another issue?
>
> Nope, I trusted Conny's review on that. :(
>
> Is this enough?
>
Nope
There is another kvm instance in that function.
Something like the following does the trick.
diff --git a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
index 0f475af84c0a..8646c99217f2 100644
--- a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
+++ b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
@@ -3061,8 +3061,8 @@ int kvm_arch_vcpu_create(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
goto out_free_sie_block;
}
- VM_EVENT(kvm, 3, "create cpu %d at 0x%pK, sie block at 0x%pK", vcpu->vcpu_id, vcpu,
- vcpu->arch.sie_block);
+ VM_EVENT(vcpu->kvm, 3, "create cpu %d at 0x%pK, sie block at 0x%pK",
+ vcpu->vcpu_id, vcpu, vcpu->arch.sie_block);
trace_kvm_s390_create_vcpu(vcpu->vcpu_id, vcpu, vcpu->arch.sie_block);
rc = kvm_s390_vcpu_setup(vcpu);
It is still compiling, test will take a while. But please push the fixup. This will help with our
automation that picks up linux-next.
> diff --git a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
> index c059b86aacd4..0f475af84c0a 100644
> --- a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
> +++ b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
> @@ -3023,9 +3023,9 @@ int kvm_arch_vcpu_create(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> vcpu->arch.sie_block->mso = 0;
> vcpu->arch.sie_block->msl = sclp.hamax;
>
> - vcpu->arch.sie_block->icpua = id;
> + vcpu->arch.sie_block->icpua = vcpu->vcpu_id;
> spin_lock_init(&vcpu->arch.local_int.lock);
> - vcpu->arch.sie_block->gd = (u32)(u64)kvm->arch.gisa_int.origin;
> + vcpu->arch.sie_block->gd = (u32)(u64)vcpu->kvm->arch.gisa_int.origin;
> if (vcpu->arch.sie_block->gd && sclp.has_gisaf)
> vcpu->arch.sie_block->gd |= GISA_FORMAT1;
> seqcount_init(&vcpu->arch.cputm_seqcount);
> @@ -3061,9 +3061,9 @@ int kvm_arch_vcpu_create(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> goto out_free_sie_block;
> }
>
> - VM_EVENT(kvm, 3, "create cpu %d at 0x%pK, sie block at 0x%pK", id, vcpu,
> + VM_EVENT(kvm, 3, "create cpu %d at 0x%pK, sie block at 0x%pK", vcpu->vcpu_id, vcpu,
> vcpu->arch.sie_block);
> - trace_kvm_s390_create_vcpu(id, vcpu, vcpu->arch.sie_block);
> + trace_kvm_s390_create_vcpu(vcpu->vcpu_id, vcpu, vcpu->arch.sie_block);
>
> rc = kvm_s390_vcpu_setup(vcpu);
> if (rc)
>
>
> Paolo
>
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: force push to kvm/next coming
2020-01-25 9:31 ` Paolo Bonzini
2020-01-25 11:31 ` Christian Borntraeger
@ 2020-01-25 11:33 ` Christian Borntraeger
2020-01-27 8:02 ` Cornelia Huck
2020-01-28 7:32 ` Christian Borntraeger
3 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Christian Borntraeger @ 2020-01-25 11:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Paolo Bonzini, KVM list, Sean Christopherson
On 25.01.20 10:31, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 25/01/20 09:29, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 24.01.20 09:38, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>>> Linux-next merge reported some bad mistakes on my part, so I'm
>>> force-pushing kvm/next. Since it was pushed only yesterday and the code
>>> is the same except for two changed lines, it shouldn't be a big deal.
>>>
>>> Paolo
>>>
>> current KVM/next has the following compile error (due to Seans rework).
>>
>> CC [M] arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.o
>> arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c: In function ‘kvm_arch_vcpu_create’:
>> arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c:3026:32: error: ‘id’ undeclared (first use in this function); did you mean ‘fd’?
>> 3026 | vcpu->arch.sie_block->icpua = id;
>> | ^~
>> | fd
>> arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c:3026:32: note: each undeclared identifier is reported only once for each function it appears in
>> arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c:3028:39: error: ‘kvm’ undeclared (first use in this function)
>> 3028 | vcpu->arch.sie_block->gd = (u32)(u64)kvm->arch.gisa_int.origin;
>> | ^~~
>> make[2]: *** [scripts/Makefile.build:266: arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.o] Error 1
>> make[1]: *** [scripts/Makefile.build:503: arch/s390/kvm] Error 2
>> make: *** [Makefile:1693: arch/s390] Error 2
>>
>> Is this part of the fixup that you will do or another issue?
>
> Nope, I trusted Conny's review on that. :(
FWIW, I did test an earlier version of Seans patch set. So something must have gone wrong during one of the other fixups.
Good news is that this was detected within a day by automated tools.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: force push to kvm/next coming
2020-01-25 11:31 ` Christian Borntraeger
@ 2020-01-26 7:28 ` Christian Borntraeger
0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Christian Borntraeger @ 2020-01-26 7:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Paolo Bonzini, KVM list, Sean Christopherson
On 25.01.20 12:31, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
[..]
> Nope
>
> There is another kvm instance in that function.
> Something like the following does the trick.
>
> diff --git a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
> index 0f475af84c0a..8646c99217f2 100644
> --- a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
> +++ b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
> @@ -3061,8 +3061,8 @@ int kvm_arch_vcpu_create(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> goto out_free_sie_block;
> }
>
> - VM_EVENT(kvm, 3, "create cpu %d at 0x%pK, sie block at 0x%pK", vcpu->vcpu_id, vcpu,
> - vcpu->arch.sie_block);
> + VM_EVENT(vcpu->kvm, 3, "create cpu %d at 0x%pK, sie block at 0x%pK",
> + vcpu->vcpu_id, vcpu, vcpu->arch.sie_block);
> trace_kvm_s390_create_vcpu(vcpu->vcpu_id, vcpu, vcpu->arch.sie_block);
>
> rc = kvm_s390_vcpu_setup(vcpu);
>
>
> It is still compiling, test will take a while. But please push the fixup. This will help with our
> automation that picks up linux-next.
The quick sniff with this fixup on top of your fixup looks good.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: force push to kvm/next coming
2020-01-25 9:31 ` Paolo Bonzini
2020-01-25 11:31 ` Christian Borntraeger
2020-01-25 11:33 ` Christian Borntraeger
@ 2020-01-27 8:02 ` Cornelia Huck
2020-01-28 7:32 ` Christian Borntraeger
3 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Cornelia Huck @ 2020-01-27 8:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Paolo Bonzini; +Cc: Christian Borntraeger, KVM list, Sean Christopherson
On Sat, 25 Jan 2020 10:31:27 +0100
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 25/01/20 09:29, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 24.01.20 09:38, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> >> Linux-next merge reported some bad mistakes on my part, so I'm
> >> force-pushing kvm/next. Since it was pushed only yesterday and the code
> >> is the same except for two changed lines, it shouldn't be a big deal.
> >>
> >> Paolo
> >>
> > current KVM/next has the following compile error (due to Seans rework).
> >
> > CC [M] arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.o
> > arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c: In function ‘kvm_arch_vcpu_create’:
> > arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c:3026:32: error: ‘id’ undeclared (first use in this function); did you mean ‘fd’?
> > 3026 | vcpu->arch.sie_block->icpua = id;
> > | ^~
> > | fd
> > arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c:3026:32: note: each undeclared identifier is reported only once for each function it appears in
> > arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c:3028:39: error: ‘kvm’ undeclared (first use in this function)
> > 3028 | vcpu->arch.sie_block->gd = (u32)(u64)kvm->arch.gisa_int.origin;
> > | ^~~
> > make[2]: *** [scripts/Makefile.build:266: arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.o] Error 1
> > make[1]: *** [scripts/Makefile.build:503: arch/s390/kvm] Error 2
> > make: *** [Makefile:1693: arch/s390] Error 2
> >
> > Is this part of the fixup that you will do or another issue?
>
> Nope, I trusted Conny's review on that. :(
Sorry about missing that, reviewed too late in the year :(
[If I actually test something, I'm usually explicitly mentioning that.]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: force push to kvm/next coming
2020-01-25 9:31 ` Paolo Bonzini
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2020-01-27 8:02 ` Cornelia Huck
@ 2020-01-28 7:32 ` Christian Borntraeger
[not found] ` <CABgObfb3egc_LyyZ2mo__hzG5c+dPjCtBUC+N5y7XBYYBn7K2w@mail.gmail.com>
3 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Christian Borntraeger @ 2020-01-28 7:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Paolo Bonzini, KVM list, Sean Christopherson
On 25.01.20 10:31, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 25/01/20 09:29, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 24.01.20 09:38, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>>> Linux-next merge reported some bad mistakes on my part, so I'm
>>> force-pushing kvm/next. Since it was pushed only yesterday and the code
>>> is the same except for two changed lines, it shouldn't be a big deal.
>>>
>>> Paolo
>>>
>> current KVM/next has the following compile error (due to Seans rework).
>>
>> CC [M] arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.o
>> arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c: In function ‘kvm_arch_vcpu_create’:
>> arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c:3026:32: error: ‘id’ undeclared (first use in this function); did you mean ‘fd’?
>> 3026 | vcpu->arch.sie_block->icpua = id;
>> | ^~
>> | fd
>> arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c:3026:32: note: each undeclared identifier is reported only once for each function it appears in
>> arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c:3028:39: error: ‘kvm’ undeclared (first use in this function)
>> 3028 | vcpu->arch.sie_block->gd = (u32)(u64)kvm->arch.gisa_int.origin;
>> | ^~~
>> make[2]: *** [scripts/Makefile.build:266: arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.o] Error 1
>> make[1]: *** [scripts/Makefile.build:503: arch/s390/kvm] Error 2
>> make: *** [Makefile:1693: arch/s390] Error 2
>>
>> Is this part of the fixup that you will do or another issue?
>
> Nope, I trusted Conny's review on that. :(
>
> Is this enough?
Any chance to get the branch fixed? linux next does not build on s390 due to that and this
is far from ideal during the merge window.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: force push to kvm/next coming
[not found] ` <CABgObfb3egc_LyyZ2mo__hzG5c+dPjCtBUC+N5y7XBYYBn7K2w@mail.gmail.com>
@ 2020-01-29 8:09 ` Christian Borntraeger
0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Christian Borntraeger @ 2020-01-29 8:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Paolo Bonzini; +Cc: KVM list, Sean Christopherson
On 28.01.20 08:40, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>
>
> Il mar 28 gen 2020, 08:32 Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com <mailto:borntraeger@de.ibm.com>> ha scritto:
>
> Any chance to get the branch fixed? linux next does not build on s390 due to that and this
> is far from ideal during the merge window.
>
>
> Yes, I will have it fixed today.
Yes, kvm/next does build on s390x. Thanks
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2020-01-29 8:09 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2020-01-24 8:38 force push to kvm/next coming Paolo Bonzini
2020-01-25 8:29 ` Christian Borntraeger
2020-01-25 9:31 ` Paolo Bonzini
2020-01-25 11:31 ` Christian Borntraeger
2020-01-26 7:28 ` Christian Borntraeger
2020-01-25 11:33 ` Christian Borntraeger
2020-01-27 8:02 ` Cornelia Huck
2020-01-28 7:32 ` Christian Borntraeger
[not found] ` <CABgObfb3egc_LyyZ2mo__hzG5c+dPjCtBUC+N5y7XBYYBn7K2w@mail.gmail.com>
2020-01-29 8:09 ` Christian Borntraeger
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.