All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: marc.zyngier@arm.com (Marc Zyngier)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v3 06/19] KVM: ARM: vgic: introduce vgic_ops and LR manipulation primitives
Date: Mon, 12 May 2014 18:28:19 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87mwemj498.fsf@approximate.cambridge.arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140509140554.GG3362@lvm> (Christoffer Dall's message of "Fri, 9 May 2014 15:05:54 +0100")

On Fri, May 09 2014 at  3:05:54 pm BST, Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@linaro.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 02:39:38PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>> In order to split the various register manipulation from the main vgic
>> code, introduce a vgic_ops structure, and start by abstracting the
>> LR manipulation code with a couple of accessors.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>
>> ---
>>  include/kvm/arm_vgic.h |  18 ++++++
>>  virt/kvm/arm/vgic.c    | 170 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------
>>  2 files changed, 132 insertions(+), 56 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/include/kvm/arm_vgic.h b/include/kvm/arm_vgic.h
>> index f738e5a..17bbe51 100644
>> --- a/include/kvm/arm_vgic.h
>> +++ b/include/kvm/arm_vgic.h
>> @@ -68,6 +68,24 @@ struct vgic_bytemap {
>>       u32 shared[VGIC_NR_SHARED_IRQS  / 4];
>>  };
>>
>> +struct kvm_vcpu;
>> +
>> +#define LR_STATE_PENDING     (1 << 0)
>> +#define LR_STATE_ACTIVE              (1 << 1)
>> +#define LR_STATE_MASK                (3 << 0)
>> +#define LR_EOI_INT           (1 << 2)
>> +
>> +struct vgic_lr {
>> +     u16     irq;
>> +     u8      source;
>> +     u8      state;
>> +};
>> +
>> +struct vgic_ops {
>> +     struct vgic_lr  (*get_lr)(const struct kvm_vcpu *, int);
>> +     void    (*set_lr)(struct kvm_vcpu *, int, struct vgic_lr);
>> +};
>> +
>>  struct vgic_dist {
>>  #ifdef CONFIG_KVM_ARM_VGIC
>>       spinlock_t              lock;
>> diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/vgic.c b/virt/kvm/arm/vgic.c
>> index 6bc6c7a..bac37b8 100644
>> --- a/virt/kvm/arm/vgic.c
>> +++ b/virt/kvm/arm/vgic.c
>> @@ -94,9 +94,12 @@ static struct device_node *vgic_node;
>>  #define ACCESS_WRITE_MASK(x) ((x) & (3 << 1))
>>
>>  static void vgic_retire_disabled_irqs(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu);
>> +static void vgic_retire_lr(int lr_nr, int irq, struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu);
>>  static void vgic_update_state(struct kvm *kvm);
>>  static void vgic_kick_vcpus(struct kvm *kvm);
>>  static void vgic_dispatch_sgi(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u32 reg);
>> +static struct vgic_lr vgic_get_lr(const struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, int lr);
>> +static void vgic_set_lr(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, int lr, struct vgic_lr lr_desc);
>>  static u32 vgic_nr_lr;
>>
>>  static unsigned int vgic_maint_irq;
>> @@ -594,18 +597,6 @@ static bool handle_mmio_sgi_reg(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
>>       return false;
>>  }
>>
>> -#define LR_CPUID(lr) \
>> -     (((lr) & GICH_LR_PHYSID_CPUID) >> GICH_LR_PHYSID_CPUID_SHIFT)
>> -#define LR_IRQID(lr) \
>> -     ((lr) & GICH_LR_VIRTUALID)
>> -
>> -static void vgic_retire_lr(int lr_nr, int irq, struct vgic_cpu *vgic_cpu)
>> -{
>> -     clear_bit(lr_nr, vgic_cpu->lr_used);
>> -     vgic_cpu->vgic_v2.vgic_lr[lr_nr] &= ~GICH_LR_STATE;
>> -     vgic_cpu->vgic_irq_lr_map[irq] = LR_EMPTY;
>> -}
>> -
>>  /**
>>   * vgic_unqueue_irqs - move pending IRQs from LRs to the distributor
>>   * @vgic_cpu: Pointer to the vgic_cpu struct holding the LRs
>> @@ -623,13 +614,10 @@ static void vgic_unqueue_irqs(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>>       struct vgic_dist *dist = &vcpu->kvm->arch.vgic;
>>       struct vgic_cpu *vgic_cpu = &vcpu->arch.vgic_cpu;
>>       int vcpu_id = vcpu->vcpu_id;
>> -     int i, irq, source_cpu;
>> -     u32 *lr;
>> +     int i;
>>
>>       for_each_set_bit(i, vgic_cpu->lr_used, vgic_cpu->nr_lr) {
>> -             lr = &vgic_cpu->vgic_v2.vgic_lr[i];
>> -             irq = LR_IRQID(*lr);
>> -             source_cpu = LR_CPUID(*lr);
>> +             struct vgic_lr lr = vgic_get_lr(vcpu, i);
>>
>>               /*
>>                * There are three options for the state bits:
>> @@ -641,7 +629,7 @@ static void vgic_unqueue_irqs(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>>                * If the LR holds only an active interrupt (not pending) then
>>                * just leave it alone.
>>                */
>> -             if ((*lr & GICH_LR_STATE) == GICH_LR_ACTIVE_BIT)
>> +             if ((lr.state & LR_STATE_MASK) == LR_STATE_ACTIVE)
>>                       continue;
>>
>>               /*
>> @@ -650,18 +638,19 @@ static void vgic_unqueue_irqs(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>>                * is fine, then we are only setting a few bits that were
>>                * already set.
>>                */
>> -             vgic_dist_irq_set(vcpu, irq);
>> -             if (irq < VGIC_NR_SGIS)
>> -                     dist->irq_sgi_sources[vcpu_id][irq] |= 1 << source_cpu;
>> -             *lr &= ~GICH_LR_PENDING_BIT;
>> +             vgic_dist_irq_set(vcpu, lr.irq);
>> +             if (lr.irq < VGIC_NR_SGIS)
>> +                     dist->irq_sgi_sources[vcpu_id][lr.irq] |= 1 << lr.source;
>> +             lr.state &= ~LR_STATE_PENDING;
>> +             vgic_set_lr(vcpu, i, lr);
>>
>>               /*
>>                * If there's no state left on the LR (it could still be
>>                * active), then the LR does not hold any useful info and can
>>                * be marked as free for other use.
>>                */
>> -             if (!(*lr & GICH_LR_STATE))
>> -                     vgic_retire_lr(i, irq, vgic_cpu);
>> +             if (!(lr.state & LR_STATE_MASK))
>> +                     vgic_retire_lr(i, lr.irq, vcpu);
>>
>>               /* Finally update the VGIC state. */
>>               vgic_update_state(vcpu->kvm);
>> @@ -989,9 +978,77 @@ static void vgic_update_state(struct kvm *kvm)
>>       }
>>  }
>>
>> +static struct vgic_lr vgic_v2_get_lr(const struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, int lr)
>> +{
>> +     struct vgic_lr lr_desc;
>> +     u32 val = vcpu->arch.vgic_cpu.vgic_v2.vgic_lr[lr];
>> +
>> +     lr_desc.irq     = val & GICH_LR_VIRTUALID;
>> +     lr_desc.source  = (val >> GICH_LR_PHYSID_CPUID_SHIFT) & 0xff;
>
> shouldn't the mask here be 0xf according to the GICv2 spec?

Actually, looks like it should be 7 instead (bits [12:10], and only when
lr_desc.irq is within 0..15). Well spotted anyway.

>
>> +     lr_desc.state   = 0;
>> +
>> +     if (val & GICH_LR_PENDING_BIT)
>> +             lr_desc.state |= LR_STATE_PENDING;
>> +     if (val & GICH_LR_ACTIVE_BIT)
>> +             lr_desc.state |= LR_STATE_ACTIVE;
>> +     if (val & GICH_LR_EOI)
>> +             lr_desc.state |= LR_EOI_INT;
>> +
>> +     return lr_desc;
>> +}
>> +
>>  #define MK_LR_PEND(src, irq) \
>>       (GICH_LR_PENDING_BIT | ((src) << GICH_LR_PHYSID_CPUID_SHIFT) | (irq))
>>
>> +static void vgic_v2_set_lr(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, int lr,
>> +                        struct vgic_lr lr_desc)
>> +{
>> +     u32 lr_val = MK_LR_PEND(lr_desc.source, lr_desc.irq);
>
> this looks a bit weird, the check just below suggests that you can
> convert a struct vgic_lr into an lr register for, for example, an lr
> which is just active and not pending.

Ah, this is probably a leftover from some previous implementation. I'll
get rid of MR_LR_PEND altogether, and rely solely on lr_desc.state.

>> +
>> +     if (lr_desc.state & LR_STATE_PENDING)
>> +             lr_val |= GICH_LR_PENDING_BIT;
>> +     if (lr_desc.state & LR_STATE_ACTIVE)
>> +             lr_val |= GICH_LR_ACTIVE_BIT;
>> +     if (lr_desc.state & LR_EOI_INT)
>> +             lr_val |= GICH_LR_EOI;
>> +
>> +     vcpu->arch.vgic_cpu.vgic_v2.vgic_lr[lr] = lr_val;
>> +
>> +     /*
>> +      * Despite being EOIed, the LR may not have been marked as
>> +      * empty.
>> +      */
>> +     if (!(lr_val & GICH_LR_STATE))
>> +             set_bit(lr, (unsigned long *)vcpu->arch.vgic_cpu.vgic_v2.vgic_elrsr);
>
> This feels weird in vgic_v2_set_lr, the name/style suggests that these
> get/set functions are just converters from a struct vgic_lr (that
> presumably common code can deal with) and architecture-specific LR
> register formats.
>
> If these functions have richer semantics than that (like maintaining the
> elrsr register), please comment that on the function.

Yeah, this is one of the corners I really dislike, but making this a
separate vector makes things even more ugly than they already are.

I'll add some comments, but feel free to suggest an alternative approach.

>> +}
>> +
>> +static const struct vgic_ops vgic_ops = {
>> +     .get_lr                 = vgic_v2_get_lr,
>> +     .set_lr                 = vgic_v2_set_lr,
>> +};
>> +
>> +static inline struct vgic_lr vgic_get_lr(const struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, int lr)
>> +{
>> +     return vgic_ops.get_lr(vcpu, lr);
>> +}
>> +
>> +static inline void vgic_set_lr(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, int lr,
>> +                            struct vgic_lr vlr)
>> +{
>> +     vgic_ops.set_lr(vcpu, lr, vlr);
>> +}
>
> inline statics in a C file?  Surely the compiler is smart enough to
> inline this without any hints.

Yup, brain fart here.

>> +
>> +static void vgic_retire_lr(int lr_nr, int irq, struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>> +{
>> +     struct vgic_cpu *vgic_cpu = &vcpu->arch.vgic_cpu;
>> +     struct vgic_lr vlr = vgic_get_lr(vcpu, lr_nr);
>
> seems like we're doing a lot of copying back and forward between the
> struct vgic_lr and the LRs on the vgic_cpu struct, I wonder if it makes
> more sense to only deal with it during the sync/flush functions, or
> maybe we end up messing with more state than necessary then?

We're doing a lot of them, but we actually don't have much copying. The
structure is small enough to fit in a single register (even on AArch32),
and we're passing it by value. So the whole state computation actually
occurs in registers.

But overall yes, I agree that we should probably try to do things in a
more staged way. I'll have a look.

>> +
>> +     vlr.state = 0;
>> +     vgic_set_lr(vcpu, lr_nr, vlr);
>> +     clear_bit(lr_nr, vgic_cpu->lr_used);
>> +     vgic_cpu->vgic_irq_lr_map[irq] = LR_EMPTY;
>> +}
>> +
>>  /*
>>   * An interrupt may have been disabled after being made pending on the
>>   * CPU interface (the classic case is a timer running while we're
>> @@ -1007,12 +1064,12 @@ static void vgic_retire_disabled_irqs(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>>       int lr;
>>
>>       for_each_set_bit(lr, vgic_cpu->lr_used, vgic_cpu->nr_lr) {
>> -             int irq = vgic_cpu->vgic_v2.vgic_lr[lr] & GICH_LR_VIRTUALID;
>> +             struct vgic_lr vlr = vgic_get_lr(vcpu, lr);
>>
>> -             if (!vgic_irq_is_enabled(vcpu, irq)) {
>> -                     vgic_retire_lr(lr, irq, vgic_cpu);
>> -                     if (vgic_irq_is_active(vcpu, irq))
>> -                             vgic_irq_clear_active(vcpu, irq);
>> +             if (!vgic_irq_is_enabled(vcpu, vlr.irq)) {
>> +                     vgic_retire_lr(lr, vlr.irq, vcpu);
>> +                     if (vgic_irq_is_active(vcpu, vlr.irq))
>> +                             vgic_irq_clear_active(vcpu, vlr.irq);
>>               }
>>       }
>>  }
>> @@ -1024,6 +1081,7 @@ static void vgic_retire_disabled_irqs(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>>  static bool vgic_queue_irq(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u8 sgi_source_id, int irq)
>>  {
>>       struct vgic_cpu *vgic_cpu = &vcpu->arch.vgic_cpu;
>> +     struct vgic_lr vlr;
>>       int lr;
>>
>>       /* Sanitize the input... */
>> @@ -1036,13 +1094,15 @@ static bool vgic_queue_irq(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u8 sgi_source_id, int irq)
>>       lr = vgic_cpu->vgic_irq_lr_map[irq];
>>
>>       /* Do we have an active interrupt for the same CPUID? */
>> -     if (lr != LR_EMPTY &&
>> -         (LR_CPUID(vgic_cpu->vgic_v2.vgic_lr[lr]) == sgi_source_id)) {
>> -             kvm_debug("LR%d piggyback for IRQ%d %x\n",
>> -                       lr, irq, vgic_cpu->vgic_v2.vgic_lr[lr]);
>> -             BUG_ON(!test_bit(lr, vgic_cpu->lr_used));
>> -             vgic_cpu->vgic_v2.vgic_lr[lr] |= GICH_LR_PENDING_BIT;
>> -             return true;
>> +     if (lr != LR_EMPTY) {
>> +             vlr = vgic_get_lr(vcpu, lr);
>> +             if (vlr.source == sgi_source_id) {
>> +                     kvm_debug("LR%d piggyback for IRQ%d\n", lr, vlr.irq);
>> +                     BUG_ON(!test_bit(lr, vgic_cpu->lr_used));
>> +                     vlr.state |= LR_STATE_PENDING;
>> +                     vgic_set_lr(vcpu, lr, vlr);
>> +                     return true;
>> +             }
>>       }
>>
>>       /* Try to use another LR for this interrupt */
>> @@ -1052,12 +1112,16 @@ static bool vgic_queue_irq(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u8 sgi_source_id, int irq)
>>               return false;
>>
>>       kvm_debug("LR%d allocated for IRQ%d %x\n", lr, irq, sgi_source_id);
>> -     vgic_cpu->vgic_v2.vgic_lr[lr] = MK_LR_PEND(sgi_source_id, irq);
>>       vgic_cpu->vgic_irq_lr_map[irq] = lr;
>>       set_bit(lr, vgic_cpu->lr_used);
>>
>> +     vlr.irq = irq;
>> +     vlr.source = sgi_source_id;
>> +     vlr.state = LR_STATE_PENDING;
>>       if (!vgic_irq_is_edge(vcpu, irq))
>> -             vgic_cpu->vgic_v2.vgic_lr[lr] |= GICH_LR_EOI;
>> +             vlr.state |= LR_EOI_INT;
>> +
>> +     vgic_set_lr(vcpu, lr, vlr);
>>
>>       return true;
>>  }
>> @@ -1180,29 +1244,23 @@ static bool vgic_process_maintenance(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>>                * Some level interrupts have been EOIed. Clear their
>>                * active bit.
>>                */
>> -             int lr, irq;
>> +             int lr;
>>
>>               for_each_set_bit(lr, (unsigned long *)vgic_cpu->vgic_v2.vgic_eisr,
>>                                vgic_cpu->nr_lr) {
>> -                     irq = vgic_cpu->vgic_v2.vgic_lr[lr] & GICH_LR_VIRTUALID;
>> +                     struct vgic_lr vlr = vgic_get_lr(vcpu, lr);
>>
>> -                     vgic_irq_clear_active(vcpu, irq);
>> -                     vgic_cpu->vgic_v2.vgic_lr[lr] &= ~GICH_LR_EOI;
>> +                     vgic_irq_clear_active(vcpu, vlr.irq);
>> +                     vlr.state = 0;
>
> slight change of semantics here.  It is still correct, but only because
> we never set the pending bit on an already active level interrupt, but I
> guess this could technically be closer to real hardware by allowing
> world-switching VMs that are processing active interrupts to pick up an
> additional pending state, in which case just setting state = 0 would be
> incorrect here, and you should instead lower the EOI mask like you did
> before.
>
> That being said, it is a pseudo-theoretical point, and you can make me
> more happy by adding:
>
> BUG_ON(vlr.state & LR_STATE_MASK);
>
> before clearing the state completely.

Putting a BUG_ON() seems a bit harsh. WARN_ON()?

>> +                     vgic_set_lr(vcpu, lr, vlr);
>>
>>                       /* Any additional pending interrupt? */
>> -                     if (vgic_dist_irq_is_pending(vcpu, irq)) {
>> -                             vgic_cpu_irq_set(vcpu, irq);
>> +                     if (vgic_dist_irq_is_pending(vcpu, vlr.irq)) {
>> +                             vgic_cpu_irq_set(vcpu, vlr.irq);
>>                               level_pending = true;
>>                       } else {
>> -                             vgic_cpu_irq_clear(vcpu, irq);
>> +                             vgic_cpu_irq_clear(vcpu, vlr.irq);
>>                       }
>> -
>> -                     /*
>> -                      * Despite being EOIed, the LR may not have
>> -                      * been marked as empty.
>> -                      */
>> -                     set_bit(lr, (unsigned long *)vgic_cpu->vgic_v2.vgic_elrsr);
>> -                     vgic_cpu->vgic_v2.vgic_lr[lr] &= ~GICH_LR_ACTIVE_BIT;
>>               }
>>       }
>>
>> @@ -1228,15 +1286,15 @@ static void __kvm_vgic_sync_hwstate(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>>       /* Clear mappings for empty LRs */
>>       for_each_set_bit(lr, (unsigned long *)vgic_cpu->vgic_v2.vgic_elrsr,
>>                        vgic_cpu->nr_lr) {
>> -             int irq;
>> +             struct vgic_lr vlr;
>>
>>               if (!test_and_clear_bit(lr, vgic_cpu->lr_used))
>>                       continue;
>>
>> -             irq = vgic_cpu->vgic_v2.vgic_lr[lr] & GICH_LR_VIRTUALID;
>> +             vlr = vgic_get_lr(vcpu, lr);
>>
>> -             BUG_ON(irq >= VGIC_NR_IRQS);
>> -             vgic_cpu->vgic_irq_lr_map[irq] = LR_EMPTY;
>> +             BUG_ON(vlr.irq >= VGIC_NR_IRQS);
>> +             vgic_cpu->vgic_irq_lr_map[vlr.irq] = LR_EMPTY;
>>       }
>>
>>       /* Check if we still have something up our sleeve... */
>> --
>> 1.8.3.4
>>
> -Christoffer
>

-- 
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny.

  reply	other threads:[~2014-05-12 17:28 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 57+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-04-16 13:39 [PATCH v3 00/19] arm64: GICv3 support Marc Zyngier
2014-04-16 13:39 ` [PATCH v3 01/19] ARM: GIC: move some bits of GICv2 to a library-type file Marc Zyngier
2014-05-09 14:05   ` Christoffer Dall
2014-05-12 16:29     ` Marc Zyngier
2014-04-16 13:39 ` [PATCH v3 02/19] arm64: initial support for GICv3 Marc Zyngier
2014-05-09 14:05   ` Christoffer Dall
2014-05-12 16:54     ` Marc Zyngier
2014-05-14 16:02       ` Christoffer Dall
2014-04-16 13:39 ` [PATCH v3 03/19] arm64: GICv3 device tree binding documentation Marc Zyngier
2014-05-09 14:05   ` Christoffer Dall
2014-04-16 13:39 ` [PATCH v3 04/19] arm64: boot protocol documentation update for GICv3 Marc Zyngier
2014-05-09 14:05   ` Christoffer Dall
2014-04-16 13:39 ` [PATCH v3 05/19] KVM: arm/arm64: vgic: move GICv2 registers to their own structure Marc Zyngier
2014-05-09 14:05   ` Christoffer Dall
2014-04-16 13:39 ` [PATCH v3 06/19] KVM: ARM: vgic: introduce vgic_ops and LR manipulation primitives Marc Zyngier
2014-05-09 14:05   ` Christoffer Dall
2014-05-12 17:28     ` Marc Zyngier [this message]
2014-05-14 16:17       ` Christoffer Dall
2014-04-16 13:39 ` [PATCH v3 07/19] KVM: ARM: vgic: abstract access to the ELRSR bitmap Marc Zyngier
2014-05-09 14:06   ` Christoffer Dall
2014-05-12 17:41     ` Marc Zyngier
2014-04-16 13:39 ` [PATCH v3 08/19] KVM: ARM: vgic: abstract EISR bitmap access Marc Zyngier
2014-05-09 14:06   ` Christoffer Dall
2014-04-16 13:39 ` [PATCH v3 09/19] KVM: ARM: vgic: abstract MISR decoding Marc Zyngier
2014-05-09 14:06   ` Christoffer Dall
2014-04-16 13:39 ` [PATCH v3 10/19] KVM: ARM: vgic: move underflow handling to vgic_ops Marc Zyngier
2014-05-09 14:06   ` Christoffer Dall
2014-04-16 13:39 ` [PATCH v3 11/19] KVM: ARM: vgic: abstract VMCR access Marc Zyngier
2014-05-09 14:06   ` Christoffer Dall
2014-05-13 17:43     ` Marc Zyngier
2014-05-14 16:28       ` Christoffer Dall
2014-04-16 13:39 ` [PATCH v3 12/19] KVM: ARM: vgic: introduce vgic_enable Marc Zyngier
2014-05-09 14:06   ` Christoffer Dall
2014-04-16 13:39 ` [PATCH v3 13/19] KVM: ARM: introduce vgic_params structure Marc Zyngier
2014-05-09 14:06   ` Christoffer Dall
2014-05-12 17:50     ` Marc Zyngier
2014-04-16 13:39 ` [PATCH v3 14/19] KVM: ARM: vgic: split GICv2 backend from the main vgic code Marc Zyngier
2014-05-09 14:07   ` Christoffer Dall
2014-05-12 17:54     ` Marc Zyngier
2014-04-16 13:39 ` [PATCH v3 15/19] arm64: KVM: remove __kvm_hyp_code_{start, end} from hyp.S Marc Zyngier
2014-05-09 14:07   ` [PATCH v3 15/19] arm64: KVM: remove __kvm_hyp_code_{start,end} " Christoffer Dall
2014-04-16 13:39 ` [PATCH v3 16/19] arm64: KVM: split GICv2 world switch from hyp code Marc Zyngier
2014-05-09 14:07   ` Christoffer Dall
2014-04-16 13:39 ` [PATCH v3 17/19] arm64: KVM: move hcr_el2 setting into vgic-v2-switch.S Marc Zyngier
2014-05-09 14:07   ` Christoffer Dall
2014-05-14 14:33     ` Marc Zyngier
2014-05-14 16:34       ` Christoffer Dall
2014-05-14 16:58         ` Marc Zyngier
2014-05-15 12:20           ` Christoffer Dall
2014-04-16 13:39 ` [PATCH v3 18/19] KVM: ARM: vgic: add the GICv3 backend Marc Zyngier
2014-05-09 14:07   ` Christoffer Dall
2014-05-14 17:47     ` Marc Zyngier
2014-05-15  8:13     ` Marc Zyngier
2014-05-15 12:18       ` Christoffer Dall
2014-04-16 13:39 ` [PATCH v3 19/19] arm64: KVM: vgic: add GICv3 world switch Marc Zyngier
2014-05-09 14:07   ` Christoffer Dall
2014-05-15  8:31     ` Marc Zyngier

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=87mwemj498.fsf@approximate.cambridge.arm.com \
    --to=marc.zyngier@arm.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.