1. 08 1月, 2013 7 次提交
  2. 18 12月, 2012 2 次提交
  3. 14 12月, 2012 3 次提交
  4. 13 12月, 2012 1 次提交
  5. 12 12月, 2012 1 次提交
  6. 11 12月, 2012 2 次提交
  7. 06 12月, 2012 1 次提交
  8. 05 12月, 2012 1 次提交
  9. 03 12月, 2012 5 次提交
  10. 01 12月, 2012 7 次提交
  11. 30 11月, 2012 3 次提交
  12. 29 11月, 2012 4 次提交
  13. 28 11月, 2012 1 次提交
  14. 23 11月, 2012 2 次提交
    • S
      s390/ccwgroup: allow drivers to call set_{on,off}line · 683c3dce
      Sebastian Ott 提交于
      Allow drivers to enable/disable ccwgroup devices.
      Acked-by: NPeter Oberparleiter <peter.oberparleiter@de.ibm.com>
      Signed-off-by: NSebastian Ott <sebott@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
      Signed-off-by: NMartin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>
      683c3dce
    • C
      s390/kvm: Fix address space mixup · ce6a04ac
      Christian Borntraeger 提交于
      I was chasing down a bug of random validity intercepts on s390.
      (guest prefix page not mapped in the host virtual aspace). Turns out
      that the problem was a wrong address space control element. The
      cause was quite complex:
      
      During paging activity a DAT protection during SIE caused a program
      interrupt. Normally, the sie retry loop tries to catch all
      interrupts during and shortly before sie to rerun the setup. The
      problem is now that protection causes a suppressing program interrupt,
      causing the PSW to point to the instruction AFTER SIE in case of DAT
      protection. This confused the logic of the retry loop to not trigger,
      instead we jumped directly back to SIE after return from
      the program  interrupt. (the protection fault handler itself did
      a rewind of the psw). This usually works quite well, but:
      
      If now the protection fault handler has to wait, another program
      might be scheduled in. Later on the sie process will be schedules
      in again. In that case the content of CR1 (primary address space)
      will be wrong because switch_to will put the user space ASCE into CR1
      and not the guest ASCE.
      
      In addition the program parameter is also wrong for every protection
      fault of a guest, since we dont issue the SPP instruction.
      
      So lets also check for PSW == instruction after SIE in the program
      check handler. Instead of expensively checking all program
      interruption codes that might be suppressing we assume that a program
      interrupt pointing after SIE was always a program interrupt in SIE.
      (Otherwise we have a kernel bug anyway).
      
      We also have to compensate the rewinding, since the C-level handlers
      will do that. Therefore we need to add a nop with the same length
      as SIE before the sie_loop.
      Signed-off-by: NChristian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>
      Signed-off-by: NMartin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>
      CC: stable@vger.kernel.org
      CC: Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>
      ce6a04ac