From: Oliver Upton <oupton@google.com>
To: Reiji Watanabe <reijiw@google.com>
Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>,
Peter Shier <pshier@google.com>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/3] KVM: arm64: Generalise VM features into a set of flags
Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2022 20:07:53 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Yi+gmV6xuiCkAtbh@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220314061959.3349716-2-reijiw@google.com>
On Sun, Mar 13, 2022 at 11:19:57PM -0700, Reiji Watanabe wrote:
> From: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
>
> We currently deal with a set of booleans for VM features,
> while they could be better represented as set of flags
> contained in an unsigned long, similarily to what we are
> doing on the CPU side.
>
> Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
> Reviewed-by: Andrew Jones <drjones@redhat.com>
> Signed-off-by: Reiji Watanabe <reijiw@google.com>
Gee, that's one popular patch! Just as a heads up, I rebased it on top
of kvmarm/next in:
http://lore.kernel.org/r/20220311174001.605719-2-oupton@google.com
since kvm_arch picked up another bool.
--
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 <oupton@google.com>
To: Reiji Watanabe <reijiw@google.com>
Cc: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>,
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
Alexandru Elisei <alexandru.elisei@arm.com>,
Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, Andrew Jones <drjones@redhat.com>,
Peng Liang <liangpeng10@huawei.com>,
Peter Shier <pshier@google.com>,
Ricardo Koller <ricarkol@google.com>,
Jing Zhang <jingzhangos@google.com>,
Raghavendra Rao Anata <rananta@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/3] KVM: arm64: Generalise VM features into a set of flags
Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2022 20:07:53 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Yi+gmV6xuiCkAtbh@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220314061959.3349716-2-reijiw@google.com>
On Sun, Mar 13, 2022 at 11:19:57PM -0700, Reiji Watanabe wrote:
> From: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
>
> We currently deal with a set of booleans for VM features,
> while they could be better represented as set of flags
> contained in an unsigned long, similarily to what we are
> doing on the CPU side.
>
> Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
> Reviewed-by: Andrew Jones <drjones@redhat.com>
> Signed-off-by: Reiji Watanabe <reijiw@google.com>
Gee, that's one popular patch! Just as a heads up, I rebased it on top
of kvmarm/next in:
http://lore.kernel.org/r/20220311174001.605719-2-oupton@google.com
since kvm_arch picked up another bool.
--
Oliver
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Oliver Upton <oupton@google.com>
To: Reiji Watanabe <reijiw@google.com>
Cc: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>,
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
Alexandru Elisei <alexandru.elisei@arm.com>,
Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, Andrew Jones <drjones@redhat.com>,
Peng Liang <liangpeng10@huawei.com>,
Peter Shier <pshier@google.com>,
Ricardo Koller <ricarkol@google.com>,
Jing Zhang <jingzhangos@google.com>,
Raghavendra Rao Anata <rananta@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/3] KVM: arm64: Generalise VM features into a set of flags
Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2022 20:07:53 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Yi+gmV6xuiCkAtbh@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220314061959.3349716-2-reijiw@google.com>
On Sun, Mar 13, 2022 at 11:19:57PM -0700, Reiji Watanabe wrote:
> From: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
>
> We currently deal with a set of booleans for VM features,
> while they could be better represented as set of flags
> contained in an unsigned long, similarily to what we are
> doing on the CPU side.
>
> Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
> Reviewed-by: Andrew Jones <drjones@redhat.com>
> Signed-off-by: Reiji Watanabe <reijiw@google.com>
Gee, that's one popular patch! Just as a heads up, I rebased it on top
of kvmarm/next in:
http://lore.kernel.org/r/20220311174001.605719-2-oupton@google.com
since kvm_arch picked up another bool.
--
Oliver
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-03-14 20:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-03-14 6:19 [PATCH v4 0/3] KVM: arm64: mixed-width check should be skipped for uninitialized vCPUs Reiji Watanabe
2022-03-14 6:19 ` Reiji Watanabe
2022-03-14 6:19 ` Reiji Watanabe
2022-03-14 6:19 ` [PATCH v4 1/3] KVM: arm64: Generalise VM features into a set of flags Reiji Watanabe
2022-03-14 6:19 ` Reiji Watanabe
2022-03-14 6:19 ` Reiji Watanabe
2022-03-14 20:07 ` Oliver Upton [this message]
2022-03-14 20:07 ` Oliver Upton
2022-03-14 20:07 ` Oliver Upton
2022-03-14 6:19 ` [PATCH v4 2/3] KVM: arm64: mixed-width check should be skipped for uninitialized vCPUs Reiji Watanabe
2022-03-14 6:19 ` Reiji Watanabe
2022-03-14 6:19 ` Reiji Watanabe
2022-03-14 20:22 ` Oliver Upton
2022-03-14 20:22 ` Oliver Upton
2022-03-14 20:22 ` Oliver Upton
2022-03-15 6:18 ` Reiji Watanabe
2022-03-15 6:18 ` Reiji Watanabe
2022-03-15 6:18 ` Reiji Watanabe
2022-03-15 7:48 ` Oliver Upton
2022-03-15 7:48 ` Oliver Upton
2022-03-15 7:48 ` Oliver Upton
2022-03-16 4:22 ` Reiji Watanabe
2022-03-16 4:22 ` Reiji Watanabe
2022-03-16 4:22 ` Reiji Watanabe
2022-03-16 6:18 ` Oliver Upton
2022-03-16 6:18 ` Oliver Upton
2022-03-16 6:18 ` Oliver Upton
2022-03-14 6:19 ` [PATCH v4 3/3] KVM: arm64: selftests: Introduce vcpu_width_config Reiji Watanabe
2022-03-14 6:19 ` Reiji Watanabe
2022-03-14 6:19 ` Reiji Watanabe
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=Yi+gmV6xuiCkAtbh@google.com \
--to=oupton@google.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=pshier@google.com \
--cc=reijiw@google.com \
--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.