On Fri, 2022-03-11 at 17:24 +0100, Vincent Whitchurch wrote:
> Import the libvhost-user from QEMU for use in the implementation of the
> virtio devices in the roadtest backend.
>
So hm, I wonder if this is the sensible thing to do?
Not that I mind importing qemu code, but:
1) the implementation is rather complex in some places, and has support
for a LOT of virtio/vhost-user features that are really not needed
in these cases, for performance etc. It's also close to 4k LOC.
2) the implementation doesn't support time-travel mode which might come
in handy
We have another implementation that might be simpler:
https://github.com/linux-test-project/usfstl/blob/main/src/vhost.c
but it probably has dependencies on other things in this library, but
vhost.c itself is only ~1k LOC. (But I need to update it, I'm sure we
have some unpublished bugfixes etc. in this code)
johannes
Dzień dobry!
Czy mógłbym przedstawić rozwiązanie, które umożliwia monitoring każdego auta w czasie rzeczywistym w tym jego pozycję, zużycie paliwa i przebieg?
Dodatkowo nasze narzędzie minimalizuje koszty utrzymania samochodów, skraca czas przejazdów, a także tworzenie planu tras czy dostaw.
Z naszej wiedzy i doświadczenia korzysta już ponad 49 tys. Klientów. Monitorujemy 809 000 pojazdów na całym świecie, co jest naszą najlepszą wizytówką.
Bardzo proszę o e-maila zwrotnego, jeśli moglibyśmy wspólnie omówić potencjał wykorzystania takiego rozwiązania w Państwa firmie.
Pozdrawiam,
Marek Onufrowicz
Currently, when we run test_progs with just executable file name, for
example 'PATH=. test_progs-no_alu32', cd_flavor_subdir() will not check
if test_progs is running as a flavored test runner and switch into
corresponding sub-directory.
This will cause test_progs-no_alu32 executed by the
'PATH=. test_progs-no_alu32' command to run in the wrong directory and
load the wrong BPF objects.
Signed-off-by: Yuntao Wang <ytcoode(a)gmail.com>
---
tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_progs.c | 6 ++++--
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_progs.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_progs.c
index 2ecb73a65206..0a4b45d7b515 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_progs.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_progs.c
@@ -761,8 +761,10 @@ int cd_flavor_subdir(const char *exec_name)
const char *flavor = strrchr(exec_name, '/');
if (!flavor)
- return 0;
- flavor++;
+ flavor = exec_name;
+ else
+ flavor++;
+
flavor = strrchr(flavor, '-');
if (!flavor)
return 0;
--
2.35.1
If a memop fails due to key checked protection, after already having
written to the guest, don't indicate suppression to the guest, as that
would imply that memory wasn't modified.
This could be considered a fix to the code introducing storage key
support, however this is a bug in KVM only if we emulate an
instructions writing to an operand spanning multiple pages, which I
don't believe we do.
Janis Schoetterl-Glausch (2):
KVM: s390: Don't indicate suppression on dirtying, failing memop
KVM: s390: selftest: Test suppression indication on key prot exception
arch/s390/kvm/gaccess.c | 47 ++++++++++++++---------
tools/testing/selftests/kvm/s390x/memop.c | 43 ++++++++++++++++++++-
2 files changed, 70 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
base-commit: 1ebdbeb03efe89f01f15df038a589077df3d21f5
--
2.32.0