Patchwork [PULL] VGIC fixes for KVM/ARM

login
register
mail settings
Submitter Marc Zyngier
Date Feb. 22, 2013, 1:58 p.m.
Message ID <b06d478e1008aa14c12fa1ea9f8da941@localhost>
Download mbox
Permalink /patch/222534/
State New
Headers show

Pull-request

git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/maz/arm-platforms.git

Comments

Marc Zyngier - Feb. 22, 2013, 1:58 p.m.
Arnd, Olof,

Please find below a pull request for a couple of fixes concerning
the VGIC implementation in KVM. No real hurry, these can probably
be applied after the merge window.

The branch is on top of mainline as of this morning, but I'm happy
to rebase it on something else if that's more convenient.

Thanks,

        M.

---------------->8--------------
The following changes since commit
2ef14f465b9e096531343f5b734cffc5f759f4a6:

  Merge branch 'x86-mm-for-linus' of
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip (2013-02-21 18:06:55
-0800)

are available in the git repository at:


  git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/maz/arm-platforms.git
kvm-arm/vgic-fixes

for you to fetch changes up to 33c83cb3c1d84b76c8270abe5487e77f83a81b22:

  ARM: KVM: vgic: take distributor lock on sync_hwstate path (2013-02-22
13:29:38 +0000)

----------------------------------------------------------------
Marc Zyngier (2):
      ARM: KVM: vgic: force EOIed LRs to the empty state
      ARM: KVM: vgic: take distributor lock on sync_hwstate path

 arch/arm/kvm/vgic.c | 35 ++++++++++++++---------------------
 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)
Russell King - ARM Linux - Feb. 22, 2013, 3:41 p.m.
On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 02:58:12PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> Arnd, Olof,
> 
> Please find below a pull request for a couple of fixes concerning
> the VGIC implementation in KVM. No real hurry, these can probably
> be applied after the merge window.
> 
> The branch is on top of mainline as of this morning, but I'm happy
> to rebase it on something else if that's more convenient.

Now, why is this being thrown at arm-soc?  Is it not core ARM stuff,
or is KVM being counted as yet another platform?
Marc Zyngier - Feb. 22, 2013, 5:28 p.m.
On Fri, 22 Feb 2013 15:41:36 +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux
<linux@arm.linux.org.uk> wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 02:58:12PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>> Arnd, Olof,
>> 
>> Please find below a pull request for a couple of fixes concerning
>> the VGIC implementation in KVM. No real hurry, these can probably
>> be applied after the merge window.
>> 
>> The branch is on top of mainline as of this morning, but I'm happy
>> to rebase it on something else if that's more convenient.
> 
> Now, why is this being thrown at arm-soc?  Is it not core ARM stuff,
> or is KVM being counted as yet another platform?

You're right. Arm-soc took care of the initial merge of the VGIC code
because of other dependencies, but now that it has been merged, I should
have sent the pull request to you. Sincere apologies.

Shall I send you another pull request, or would you prefer these patches
in the patch system?

Thanks,

        M.
Russell King - ARM Linux - Feb. 22, 2013, 7:18 p.m.
On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 06:28:41PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On Fri, 22 Feb 2013 15:41:36 +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux
> <linux@arm.linux.org.uk> wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 02:58:12PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> >> Arnd, Olof,
> >> 
> >> Please find below a pull request for a couple of fixes concerning
> >> the VGIC implementation in KVM. No real hurry, these can probably
> >> be applied after the merge window.
> >> 
> >> The branch is on top of mainline as of this morning, but I'm happy
> >> to rebase it on something else if that's more convenient.
> > 
> > Now, why is this being thrown at arm-soc?  Is it not core ARM stuff,
> > or is KVM being counted as yet another platform?
> 
> You're right. Arm-soc took care of the initial merge of the VGIC code
> because of other dependencies, but now that it has been merged, I should
> have sent the pull request to you. Sincere apologies.
> 
> Shall I send you another pull request, or would you prefer these patches
> in the patch system?

Does it need another pull request or is your original sufficient for me
to pull?
Marc Zyngier - Feb. 22, 2013, 7:30 p.m.
On Fri, 22 Feb 2013 19:18:25 +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux
<linux@arm.linux.org.uk> wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 06:28:41PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>> On Fri, 22 Feb 2013 15:41:36 +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux
>> <linux@arm.linux.org.uk> wrote:
>> > On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 02:58:12PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>> >> Arnd, Olof,
>> >> 
>> >> Please find below a pull request for a couple of fixes concerning
>> >> the VGIC implementation in KVM. No real hurry, these can probably
>> >> be applied after the merge window.
>> >> 
>> >> The branch is on top of mainline as of this morning, but I'm happy
>> >> to rebase it on something else if that's more convenient.
>> > 
>> > Now, why is this being thrown at arm-soc?  Is it not core ARM stuff,
>> > or is KVM being counted as yet another platform?
>> 
>> You're right. Arm-soc took care of the initial merge of the VGIC code
>> because of other dependencies, but now that it has been merged, I
should
>> have sent the pull request to you. Sincere apologies.
>> 
>> Shall I send you another pull request, or would you prefer these
patches
>> in the patch system?
> 
> Does it need another pull request or is your original sufficient for me
> to pull?

It is directly based on mainline as of this morning, so it should be good
for you to pull it.

Thanks,

        M.
Marc Zyngier - March 22, 2013, 4:29 p.m.
On 22/02/13 19:30, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On Fri, 22 Feb 2013 19:18:25 +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux
> <linux@arm.linux.org.uk> wrote:
>> On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 06:28:41PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>>> On Fri, 22 Feb 2013 15:41:36 +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux
>>> <linux@arm.linux.org.uk> wrote:
>>>> On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 02:58:12PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>>>>> Arnd, Olof,
>>>>>
>>>>> Please find below a pull request for a couple of fixes concerning
>>>>> the VGIC implementation in KVM. No real hurry, these can probably
>>>>> be applied after the merge window.
>>>>>
>>>>> The branch is on top of mainline as of this morning, but I'm happy
>>>>> to rebase it on something else if that's more convenient.
>>>>
>>>> Now, why is this being thrown at arm-soc?  Is it not core ARM stuff,
>>>> or is KVM being counted as yet another platform?
>>>
>>> You're right. Arm-soc took care of the initial merge of the VGIC code
>>> because of other dependencies, but now that it has been merged, I
> should
>>> have sent the pull request to you. Sincere apologies.
>>>
>>> Shall I send you another pull request, or would you prefer these
> patches
>>> in the patch system?
>>
>> Does it need another pull request or is your original sufficient for me
>> to pull?
> 
> It is directly based on mainline as of this morning, so it should be good
> for you to pull it.

Hi Russell,

Any chance this two patches can make it into the next -rc? They do fix a
couple of important issues (loss of guest interrupts).

I'm happy to either resend a pull request if you want one, or put them
in the patch system if that's more convenient.

Thanks,

	M.
Russell King - ARM Linux - March 22, 2013, 5:13 p.m.
On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 04:29:41PM +0000, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> Hi Russell,
> 
> Any chance this two patches can make it into the next -rc? They do fix a
> couple of important issues (loss of guest interrupts).
> 
> I'm happy to either resend a pull request if you want one, or put them
> in the patch system if that's more convenient.

Gah.  Welcome to the problems of email getting buried... these lists are
currently running at 300 messages per day - this was completely off my
radar.  It's the same old problem - unless I process the email as soon
as I see it, it _will_ get buried and forgotten.

If people can send pull requests for _me_ to linux+pull@arm.linux.org.uk,
I can direct them into a separate mailbox (and know for certain that
they're intending _me_ to pull them) and that will remove the problem
of stuff being buried like this.