From: Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@linux.dev>
To: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
Cc: Akihiko Odaki <akihiko.odaki@daynix.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvmarm@lists.linux.dev,
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@linaro.org>,
Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
Alexandru Elisei <alexandru.elisei@arm.com>,
James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
asahi@lists.linux.dev, Alyssa Rosenzweig <alyssa@rosenzweig.io>,
Sven Peter <sven@svenpeter.dev>, Hector Martin <marcan@marcan.st>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] KVM: arm64: Handle CCSIDR associativity mismatches
Date: Fri, 2 Dec 2022 18:54:51 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Y4pJ+wnzHv0Rpws+@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87k03au36k.wl-maz@kernel.org>
On Thu, Dec 01, 2022 at 11:14:43PM +0000, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On Thu, 01 Dec 2022 18:29:51 +0000,
> Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@linux.dev> wrote:
> > Could we extend your suggestion about accepting different topologies to
> > effectively tolerate _any_ topology provided by userspace? KVM can
> > default to the virtual topology, but a well-informed userspace could
> > still provide different values to its guest. No point in trying to
> > babyproofing the UAPI further, IMO.
>
> I think this is *exactly* what I suggested. Any valid topology should
> be able to be restored, as we currently present the VM with any
> topology the host HW may have. This must be preserved.
Ah, I was narrowly reading into the conversation as it relates to the M2
implementation, my bad. SGTM :)
--
Thanks,
Oliver
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@linux.dev>
To: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
Cc: Alyssa Rosenzweig <alyssa@rosenzweig.io>,
Hector Martin <marcan@marcan.st>,
Akihiko Odaki <akihiko.odaki@daynix.com>,
Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@linaro.org>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, Sven Peter <sven@svenpeter.dev>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, asahi@lists.linux.dev,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
kvmarm@lists.linux.dev, kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] KVM: arm64: Handle CCSIDR associativity mismatches
Date: Fri, 2 Dec 2022 18:54:51 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Y4pJ+wnzHv0Rpws+@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87k03au36k.wl-maz@kernel.org>
On Thu, Dec 01, 2022 at 11:14:43PM +0000, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On Thu, 01 Dec 2022 18:29:51 +0000,
> Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@linux.dev> wrote:
> > Could we extend your suggestion about accepting different topologies to
> > effectively tolerate _any_ topology provided by userspace? KVM can
> > default to the virtual topology, but a well-informed userspace could
> > still provide different values to its guest. No point in trying to
> > babyproofing the UAPI further, IMO.
>
> I think this is *exactly* what I suggested. Any valid topology should
> be able to be restored, as we currently present the VM with any
> topology the host HW may have. This must be preserved.
Ah, I was narrowly reading into the conversation as it relates to the M2
implementation, my bad. SGTM :)
--
Thanks,
Oliver
_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@linux.dev>
To: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
Cc: Akihiko Odaki <akihiko.odaki@daynix.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvmarm@lists.linux.dev,
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@linaro.org>,
Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
Alexandru Elisei <alexandru.elisei@arm.com>,
James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
asahi@lists.linux.dev, Alyssa Rosenzweig <alyssa@rosenzweig.io>,
Sven Peter <sven@svenpeter.dev>, Hector Martin <marcan@marcan.st>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] KVM: arm64: Handle CCSIDR associativity mismatches
Date: Fri, 2 Dec 2022 18:54:51 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Y4pJ+wnzHv0Rpws+@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87k03au36k.wl-maz@kernel.org>
On Thu, Dec 01, 2022 at 11:14:43PM +0000, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On Thu, 01 Dec 2022 18:29:51 +0000,
> Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@linux.dev> wrote:
> > Could we extend your suggestion about accepting different topologies to
> > effectively tolerate _any_ topology provided by userspace? KVM can
> > default to the virtual topology, but a well-informed userspace could
> > still provide different values to its guest. No point in trying to
> > babyproofing the UAPI further, IMO.
>
> I think this is *exactly* what I suggested. Any valid topology should
> be able to be restored, as we currently present the VM with any
> topology the host HW may have. This must be preserved.
Ah, I was narrowly reading into the conversation as it relates to the M2
implementation, my bad. SGTM :)
--
Thanks,
Oliver
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-12-02 18:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 55+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-12-01 10:49 [PATCH 0/3] KVM: arm64: Handle CCSIDR associativity mismatches Akihiko Odaki
2022-12-01 10:49 ` Akihiko Odaki
2022-12-01 10:49 ` Akihiko Odaki
2022-12-01 10:49 ` Akihiko Odaki
2022-12-01 10:49 ` [PATCH 1/3] KVM: arm64: Make CCSIDRs consistent Akihiko Odaki
2022-12-01 10:49 ` Akihiko Odaki
2022-12-01 10:49 ` Akihiko Odaki
2022-12-01 10:49 ` Akihiko Odaki
2022-12-01 10:49 ` [PATCH 2/3] arm64: errata: Check for mismatched cache associativity Akihiko Odaki
2022-12-01 10:49 ` Akihiko Odaki
2022-12-01 10:49 ` Akihiko Odaki
2022-12-01 10:49 ` Akihiko Odaki
2022-12-01 10:49 ` [PATCH 3/3] KVM: arm64: Handle CCSIDR associativity mismatches Akihiko Odaki
2022-12-01 10:49 ` Akihiko Odaki
2022-12-01 10:49 ` Akihiko Odaki
2022-12-01 10:49 ` Akihiko Odaki
2022-12-01 11:06 ` [PATCH 0/3] " Marc Zyngier
2022-12-01 11:06 ` Marc Zyngier
2022-12-01 11:06 ` Marc Zyngier
2022-12-01 17:26 ` Akihiko Odaki
2022-12-01 17:26 ` Akihiko Odaki
2022-12-01 17:26 ` Akihiko Odaki
2022-12-01 23:13 ` Marc Zyngier
2022-12-01 23:13 ` Marc Zyngier
2022-12-01 23:13 ` Marc Zyngier
2022-12-02 5:17 ` Akihiko Odaki
2022-12-02 5:17 ` Akihiko Odaki
2022-12-02 5:17 ` Akihiko Odaki
2022-12-02 9:40 ` Marc Zyngier
2022-12-02 9:40 ` Marc Zyngier
2022-12-02 9:40 ` Marc Zyngier
2022-12-02 9:55 ` Akihiko Odaki
2022-12-02 9:55 ` Akihiko Odaki
2022-12-02 9:55 ` Akihiko Odaki
2022-12-04 14:57 ` Marc Zyngier
2022-12-04 14:57 ` Marc Zyngier
2022-12-04 14:57 ` Marc Zyngier
2022-12-11 5:25 ` Akihiko Odaki
2022-12-11 5:25 ` Akihiko Odaki
2022-12-11 5:25 ` Akihiko Odaki
2022-12-11 10:21 ` Marc Zyngier
2022-12-11 10:21 ` Marc Zyngier
2022-12-11 10:21 ` Marc Zyngier
2022-12-11 10:44 ` Akihiko Odaki
2022-12-11 10:44 ` Akihiko Odaki
2022-12-11 10:44 ` Akihiko Odaki
2022-12-01 18:29 ` Oliver Upton
2022-12-01 18:29 ` Oliver Upton
2022-12-01 18:29 ` Oliver Upton
2022-12-01 23:14 ` Marc Zyngier
2022-12-01 23:14 ` Marc Zyngier
2022-12-01 23:14 ` Marc Zyngier
2022-12-02 18:54 ` Oliver Upton [this message]
2022-12-02 18:54 ` Oliver Upton
2022-12-02 18:54 ` Oliver Upton
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=Y4pJ+wnzHv0Rpws+@google.com \
--to=oliver.upton@linux.dev \
--cc=akihiko.odaki@daynix.com \
--cc=alexandru.elisei@arm.com \
--cc=alyssa@rosenzweig.io \
--cc=asahi@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=james.morse@arm.com \
--cc=kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu \
--cc=kvmarm@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=marcan@marcan.st \
--cc=mathieu.poirier@linaro.org \
--cc=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=suzuki.poulose@arm.com \
--cc=sven@svenpeter.dev \
--cc=will@kernel.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.