From: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
To: Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@arm.com>
Cc: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@google.com>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>,
Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@linux.dev>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@arm.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
Joey Gouly <joey.gouly@arm.com>,
Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
Zenghui Yu <yuzenghui@huawei.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, kvmarm@lists.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v1 0/3] Update tlb invalidation routines for FEAT_LPA2
Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2023 17:49:56 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZVJhxF4y2Tds2dRn@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1bdcdd85-9470-408c-aaac-fa4548bb2385@arm.com>
On Mon, Nov 13, 2023 at 04:44:58PM +0000, Ryan Roberts wrote:
> On 13/11/2023 13:27, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > If these patches are needed for Ard's series (I think they do), they
> > could be posted together. But first we need to split Ard's series into
> > at least two: reworking the memory map together with moving (some of)
> > the init code to C and the actual LPA2 stage 1 support. We might even
> > through LPA2 stage 2 on top if we feel brave ;). We can queue them all
> > together but having separate series gives us an option to drop bits if
> > needed.
>
> Sorry I'm not completely sure what you are suggesting I do here. In the context
> of the lpa2/kvm series, Marc previously said he would merge it for v6.8 if I
> posted against v6.7-rc1 (which is what I'm gearing up for now).
If we merge your series independently of Ard's, that's fine, these three
patches can go together as a prefix.
> My series and Ard's are independent except that they both depend on the 3
> patches in this RFC. Ard has just suggested he would prefix his series with
> these 3 patches and I would continue to do the same, then they can be handled as
> 2 independent series (or more if Ard is splitting his) - the first 3 patches
> will just desolve to nothing for the series that goes in second.
>
> Does that work for you, are are you suggesting I should re-post this as an
> independent series?
No need to. Just post your LPA2 patches with these three as a prefix.
Ard can include them as well and if it gets to merging both, we'll sort
out a small stable branch for these three patches.
--
Catalin
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
To: Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@arm.com>
Cc: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@google.com>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>,
Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@linux.dev>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@arm.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
Joey Gouly <joey.gouly@arm.com>,
Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
Zenghui Yu <yuzenghui@huawei.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, kvmarm@lists.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v1 0/3] Update tlb invalidation routines for FEAT_LPA2
Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2023 17:49:56 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZVJhxF4y2Tds2dRn@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1bdcdd85-9470-408c-aaac-fa4548bb2385@arm.com>
On Mon, Nov 13, 2023 at 04:44:58PM +0000, Ryan Roberts wrote:
> On 13/11/2023 13:27, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > If these patches are needed for Ard's series (I think they do), they
> > could be posted together. But first we need to split Ard's series into
> > at least two: reworking the memory map together with moving (some of)
> > the init code to C and the actual LPA2 stage 1 support. We might even
> > through LPA2 stage 2 on top if we feel brave ;). We can queue them all
> > together but having separate series gives us an option to drop bits if
> > needed.
>
> Sorry I'm not completely sure what you are suggesting I do here. In the context
> of the lpa2/kvm series, Marc previously said he would merge it for v6.8 if I
> posted against v6.7-rc1 (which is what I'm gearing up for now).
If we merge your series independently of Ard's, that's fine, these three
patches can go together as a prefix.
> My series and Ard's are independent except that they both depend on the 3
> patches in this RFC. Ard has just suggested he would prefix his series with
> these 3 patches and I would continue to do the same, then they can be handled as
> 2 independent series (or more if Ard is splitting his) - the first 3 patches
> will just desolve to nothing for the series that goes in second.
>
> Does that work for you, are are you suggesting I should re-post this as an
> independent series?
No need to. Just post your LPA2 patches with these three as a prefix.
Ard can include them as well and if it gets to merging both, we'll sort
out a small stable branch for these three patches.
--
Catalin
_______________________________________________
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:[~2023-11-13 17:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-10-27 11:56 [RFC PATCH v1 0/3] Update tlb invalidation routines for FEAT_LPA2 Ryan Roberts
2023-10-27 11:56 ` Ryan Roberts
2023-10-27 11:56 ` [RFC PATCH v1 1/3] arm64/mm: Modify range-based tlbi to decrement scale Ryan Roberts
2023-10-27 11:56 ` Ryan Roberts
2023-10-27 11:56 ` [RFC PATCH v1 2/3] arm64/mm: Add lpa2_is_enabled() kvm_lpa2_is_enabled() stubs Ryan Roberts
2023-10-27 11:56 ` Ryan Roberts
2023-10-27 11:56 ` [RFC PATCH v1 3/3] arm64/mm: Update tlb invalidation routines for FEAT_LPA2 Ryan Roberts
2023-10-27 11:56 ` Ryan Roberts
2023-11-13 11:55 ` [RFC PATCH v1 0/3] " Ryan Roberts
2023-11-13 11:55 ` Ryan Roberts
2023-11-13 12:20 ` Marc Zyngier
2023-11-13 12:20 ` Marc Zyngier
2023-11-13 12:29 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2023-11-13 12:29 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2023-11-13 12:42 ` Ryan Roberts
2023-11-13 12:42 ` Ryan Roberts
2023-11-13 13:27 ` Catalin Marinas
2023-11-13 13:27 ` Catalin Marinas
2023-11-13 16:44 ` Ryan Roberts
2023-11-13 16:44 ` Ryan Roberts
2023-11-13 17:49 ` Catalin Marinas [this message]
2023-11-13 17:49 ` Catalin Marinas
2023-11-14 11:25 ` Ryan Roberts
2023-11-14 11:25 ` Ryan Roberts
2023-11-15 22:33 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2023-11-15 22:33 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2023-11-23 17:04 ` Catalin Marinas
2023-11-23 17:04 ` Catalin Marinas
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=ZVJhxF4y2Tds2dRn@arm.com \
--to=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=anshuman.khandual@arm.com \
--cc=ardb@google.com \
--cc=ardb@kernel.org \
--cc=james.morse@arm.com \
--cc=joey.gouly@arm.com \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=kvmarm@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=oliver.upton@linux.dev \
--cc=ryan.roberts@arm.com \
--cc=suzuki.poulose@arm.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
--cc=yuzenghui@huawei.com \
/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.