tech-privileged@lists.riscv.org

Home Messages Hashtags Subgroups

Messages

Topics Expanded Polls

Export Group Data

Between

and

Re: Disabling and re-enabling extensions

OK by me. PR is here: https://github.com/riscv/riscv-isa-manual/pull/585

By andrew@... · #354 ·

Re: Disabling and re-enabling extensions

Given the comments excerpted down below that argue for specifying that extension state is UNSPECIFIED after being disabled and then re-enabled, and given that no particular arguments or use cases have

By Greg Favor · #353 ·

Re: Proposal: Delegating Exceptions from VS-mode or VU-mode to U-mode

OK, we had a closer look at the N extension, and it doesn’t do much for us, should have looked closer in the first place :-( Hence I don’t particularly care about this one – sorry for the

By Gernot <gernot.heiser@...> · #352 ·

Re: Proposal: Delegating Exceptions from VS-mode or VU-mode to U-mode

Gernot wrote: Aside from the fact that doing this requires some version of the quasi-deprecated N extension be implemented in addition to the hypervisor extension, the main problem with this idea is

By John Hauser · #351 ·

Re: Proposal: Delegating Exceptions from VS-mode or VU-mode to U-mode

You can achieve the same thing using the hypervisor extension analogously to how M/U systems can avoid user-level interrupts by switching to M/S/U. Instead of running the kernel in S-mode and drivers

By Jonathan Behrens <behrensj@...> · #350 ·

Re: Proposal: Delegating Exceptions from VS-mode or VU-mode to U-mode

On 2020-09-19 5:29 a.m., Gernot wrote: I don't know if these developments will address your concerns, but I see the synergy of these two task groups, Fast-interrupts and Code Size

By David Horner · #349 ·

Re: Proposal: Delegating Exceptions from VS-mode or VU-mode to U-mode

On 19 Sep 2020, at 15:53, Andrew Waterman <andrew@...> wrote: That’s a real concern, and I seem to have missed any discussion about this. I suspect that this also reflects a confusion resulting from

By Gernot <gernot.heiser@...> · #348 ·

Re: Proposal: Delegating Exceptions from VS-mode or VU-mode to U-mode

The N extension is effectively deprecated. We don’t see sufficient demand for user-level interrupts in managed/Unix-like environments to pursue that approach at this time. We do see demand for this

By andrew@... · #347 ·

Re: Proposal: Delegating Exceptions from VS-mode or VU-mode to U-mode

Hi, The context switching overhead for VirtIO interrupts that this proposal is trying to solve is already solved across architectures by: KVM in-kernel VirtIO backends emulation (i.e. VHost)

By Anup Patel · #346 ·

Re: Proposal: Delegating Exceptions from VS-mode or VU-mode to U-mode

If I understand correctly, there is a security issue around the URET instruction. All the controls for URET are accessible from User mode. This is OK in the scenario you describe where U-Mode is

By Phil McCoy · #345 ·

Proposal: Accelerating Handling User-level Interrupts

Hi all, When we applied user-level interrupts in N extension to the Unix-like OS, there is no way to directly handle user-level interrupts in userspace bypassing the kernel. This makes little use

By Yifei Jiang · #344 ·

Proposal: Delegating Exceptions from VS-mode or VU-mode to U-mode

Hi all, In this proposal, we extended N extension and applied it to H extension for improving the performance of virtual I/O devices in the virtualization scenario. We proposed a new mechanism to

By Yifei Jiang · #343 ·

Re: platform specific interrupt control

Yes, the behavior you'd like follows implicitly from the definition of mideleg.

By andrew@... · #342 ·

platform specific interrupt control

Hi, The definition of the interrupt pending and enable registers, example mip and mie, define bits 16 and above as available for platform or custom use. Section 3.1.9 Machine Interrupt Registers (mip

By Sanjay Patel <spatel@...> · #341 ·

Re: Disabling and re-enabling extensions

Emulating systems that don’t support some extension either has SW that doesn’t use the extension, in which case it does t matter if the extension is enabled or disable, or does use it, in which

By Allen Baum · #340 ·

Re: Disabling and re-enabling extensions

Emulating less-capable systems.

By andrew@... · #339 ·

Re: Proposal: Supervisor Timer CSR and Virtual Supervisor Timer CSR

zhaosiqi (Siqi) wrote: I believe a hypervisor can get the same effect by saving and clearing bit 6 of hideleg on entry to a trap handler in HS mode. On trap exit, restore the saved value of bit 6 of

By John Hauser · #338 ·

Re: Proposal: Supervisor Timer CSR and Virtual Supervisor Timer CSR

Siqi, Thanks. That narrows down where we are differing. If the hypervisor has set hideleg bit 6 (so that VS-level timer interrupts can be received by VS-mode while V=1), then any new pending

By Greg Favor · #337 ·

Re: Proposal: Supervisor Timer CSR and Virtual Supervisor Timer CSR

Hi Greg, I understand your concern. In fact, the goal is not to provide more than one vstimecmp CSR. You are right that when a VM is context switched out, it's vstimecmp CSR is also switched out.

By Siqi Zhao · #336 ·

Re: Proposal: Supervisor Timer CSR and Virtual Supervisor Timer CSR

Siqi, Thanks for your clarification. If I understand correctly, your goal (analogous to SGEI as you mention) is to enable a pending virtual timer interrupt, even for a VM not currently context

By Greg Favor · #335 ·

981 - 1000 of 1334

Home Hashtags Subgroups Terms