1. 01 4月, 2015 6 次提交
  2. 31 3月, 2015 2 次提交
    • C
      KVM: s390: enable more features that need no hypervisor changes · a3ed8dae
      Christian Borntraeger 提交于
      After some review about what these facilities do, the following
      facilities will work under KVM and can, therefore, be reported
      to the guest if the cpu model and the host cpu provide this bit.
      
      There are plans underway to make the whole bit thing more readable,
      but its not yet finished. So here are some last bit changes and
      we enhance the KVM mask with:
      
      9 The sense-running-status facility is installed in the
        z/Architecture architectural mode.
        ---> handled by SIE or KVM
      
      10 The conditional-SSKE facility is installed in the
         z/Architecture architectural mode.
        ---> handled by SIE. KVM will retry SIE
      
      13 The IPTE-range facility is installed in the
         z/Architecture architectural mode.
        ---> handled by SIE. KVM will retry SIE
      
      36 The enhanced-monitor facility is installed in the
         z/Architecture architectural mode.
        ---> handled by SIE
      
      47 The CMPSC-enhancement facility is installed in the
         z/Architecture architectural mode.
        ---> handled by SIE
      
      48 The decimal-floating-point zoned-conversion facility
         is installed in the z/Architecture architectural mode.
        ---> handled by SIE
      
      49 The execution-hint, load-and-trap, miscellaneous-
         instruction-extensions and processor-assist
        ---> handled by SIE
      
      51 The local-TLB-clearing facility is installed in the
         z/Architecture architectural mode.
        ---> handled by SIE
      
      52 The interlocked-access facility 2 is installed.
        ---> handled by SIE
      
      53 The load/store-on-condition facility 2 and load-and-
         zero-rightmost-byte facility are installed in the
         z/Architecture architectural mode.
        ---> handled by SIE
      
      57 The message-security-assist-extension-5 facility is
        installed in the z/Architecture architectural mode.
        ---> handled by SIE
      
      66 The reset-reference-bits-multiple facility is installed
        in the z/Architecture architectural mode.
        ---> handled by SIE. KVM will retry SIE
      
      80 The decimal-floating-point packed-conversion
         facility is installed in the z/Architecture architectural
         mode.
        ---> handled by SIE
      Signed-off-by: NChristian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>
      Tested-by: NMichael Mueller <mimu@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
      Acked-by: NCornelia Huck <cornelia.huck@de.ibm.com>
      a3ed8dae
    • D
      KVM: s390: store the breaking-event address on pgm interrupts · 2ba45968
      David Hildenbrand 提交于
      If the PER-3 facility is installed, the breaking-event address is to be
      stored in the low core.
      
      There is no facility bit for PER-3 in stfl(e) and Linux always uses the
      value at address 272 no matter if PER-3 is available or not.
      We can't hide its existence from the guest. All program interrupts
      injected via the SIE automatically store this information if the PER-3
      facility is available in the hypervisor. Also the itdb contains the
      address automatically.
      
      As there is no switch to turn this mechanism off, let's simply make it
      consistent and also store the breaking event address in case of manual
      program interrupt injection.
      Reviewed-by: NJens Freimann <jfrei@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
      Signed-off-by: NDavid Hildenbrand <dahi@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
      Reviewed-by: NChristian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>
      Signed-off-by: NChristian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>
      Acked-by: NCornelia Huck <cornelia.huck@de.ibm.com>
      2ba45968
  3. 17 3月, 2015 11 次提交
  4. 06 3月, 2015 15 次提交
  5. 04 3月, 2015 4 次提交
  6. 03 3月, 2015 1 次提交
  7. 23 2月, 2015 1 次提交
    • L
      Linux 4.0-rc1 · c517d838
      Linus Torvalds 提交于
      .. after extensive statistical analysis of my G+ polling, I've come to
      the inescapable conclusion that internet polls are bad.
      
      Big surprise.
      
      But "Hurr durr I'ma sheep" trounced "I like online polls" by a 62-to-38%
      margin, in a poll that people weren't even supposed to participate in.
      Who can argue with solid numbers like that? 5,796 votes from people who
      can't even follow the most basic directions?
      
      In contrast, "v4.0" beat out "v3.20" by a slimmer margin of 56-to-44%,
      but with a total of 29,110 votes right now.
      
      Now, arguably, that vote spread is only about 3,200 votes, which is less
      than the almost six thousand votes that the "please ignore" poll got, so
      it could be considered noise.
      
      But hey, I asked, so I'll honor the votes.
      c517d838