Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1721014 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2017-08-28 07:00 +0200 |
| Last post | 2017-09-04 08:10 +0200 |
| Articles | 2 — 1 participant |
Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel
linux-next: manual merge of the kvm tree with the tip tree Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> - 2017-08-28 07:00 +0200
Re: linux-next: manual merge of the kvm tree with the tip tree Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> - 2017-09-04 08:10 +0200
| From | Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-08-28 07:00 +0200 |
| Subject | linux-next: manual merge of the kvm tree with the tip tree |
| Message-ID | <ujkjv-Z2-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the kvm tree got a conflict in:
arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c
between commit:
ea2800ddb20d ("kvm/x86: Avoid clearing the C-bit in rsvd_bits()")
from the tip tree and commit:
d6321d493319 ("KVM: x86: generalize guest_cpuid_has_ helpers")
from the kvm tree.
I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial
conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree
is submitted for merging. You may also want to consider cooperating
with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly
complex conflicts.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
diff --cc arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c
index 04d750813c9d,2a8a6e3e2a31..000000000000
--- a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c
@@@ -4116,21 -4157,11 +4162,21 @@@ reset_shadow_zero_bits_mask(struct kvm_
* Passing "true" to the last argument is okay; it adds a check
* on bit 8 of the SPTEs which KVM doesn't use anyway.
*/
- __reset_rsvds_bits_mask(vcpu, &context->shadow_zero_check,
+ shadow_zero_check = &context->shadow_zero_check;
+ __reset_rsvds_bits_mask(vcpu, shadow_zero_check,
boot_cpu_data.x86_phys_bits,
context->shadow_root_level, uses_nx,
- guest_cpuid_has_gbpages(vcpu), is_pse(vcpu),
- true);
+ guest_cpuid_has(vcpu, X86_FEATURE_GBPAGES),
+ is_pse(vcpu), true);
+
+ if (!shadow_me_mask)
+ return;
+
+ for (i = context->shadow_root_level; --i >= 0;) {
+ shadow_zero_check->rsvd_bits_mask[0][i] &= ~shadow_me_mask;
+ shadow_zero_check->rsvd_bits_mask[1][i] &= ~shadow_me_mask;
+ }
+
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(reset_shadow_zero_bits_mask);
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-09-04 08:10 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <ulSK6-1QU-11@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1721014 |
Hi all,
On Mon, 28 Aug 2017 14:52:09 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the kvm tree got a conflict in:
>
> arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c
>
> between commit:
>
> ea2800ddb20d ("kvm/x86: Avoid clearing the C-bit in rsvd_bits()")
>
> from the tip tree and commit:
>
> d6321d493319 ("KVM: x86: generalize guest_cpuid_has_ helpers")
>
> from the kvm tree.
>
> I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
> is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial
> conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree
> is submitted for merging. You may also want to consider cooperating
> with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly
> complex conflicts.
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell
>
> diff --cc arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c
> index 04d750813c9d,2a8a6e3e2a31..000000000000
> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c
> @@@ -4116,21 -4157,11 +4162,21 @@@ reset_shadow_zero_bits_mask(struct kvm_
> * Passing "true" to the last argument is okay; it adds a check
> * on bit 8 of the SPTEs which KVM doesn't use anyway.
> */
> - __reset_rsvds_bits_mask(vcpu, &context->shadow_zero_check,
> + shadow_zero_check = &context->shadow_zero_check;
> + __reset_rsvds_bits_mask(vcpu, shadow_zero_check,
> boot_cpu_data.x86_phys_bits,
> context->shadow_root_level, uses_nx,
> - guest_cpuid_has_gbpages(vcpu), is_pse(vcpu),
> - true);
> + guest_cpuid_has(vcpu, X86_FEATURE_GBPAGES),
> + is_pse(vcpu), true);
> +
> + if (!shadow_me_mask)
> + return;
> +
> + for (i = context->shadow_root_level; --i >= 0;) {
> + shadow_zero_check->rsvd_bits_mask[0][i] &= ~shadow_me_mask;
> + shadow_zero_check->rsvd_bits_mask[1][i] &= ~shadow_me_mask;
> + }
> +
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(reset_shadow_zero_bits_mask);
>
Just a reminder that this conflict still exists.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel
csiph-web