From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DF8FDDF59; Sat, 9 May 2026 00:43:13 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1778287394; cv=none; b=qeInjR1zSL4bj4OX/BUuPTVaXfQr0IZDF5xXKLq7vBCl3qnhcvg6eFYvx1u8beAVRIH8R+VxOX0rHc21h36ed8BXkTJ4+6gVo1yCiDD7guB3YM1WHWlXD0cHk3FacyZYyKsjLohoaGQqIGyffkJq4HOg59D/UHkAWSXrQghORcQ= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1778287394; c=relaxed/simple; bh=HPCGeWyV6//s0b3Spt2whRmbIin4/wMGdnJC6EtPgXM=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=PVTKgBSEvt1AaOuvpWuAsNc53KEUXmfJWboZlXr45aS/XDZpPVVI9vXxg1Vk2/S/+8/rt5aq5yGXe1tccZoPXch5I/N1HFFR2J5PNlLZBAryvx3P39DElX81yfpuCOjublMDEn557A8w5B9SwImTzxggpspts2Lnx8r0Dn3rRak= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=ZZjWqzNi; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="ZZjWqzNi" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9ACB7C2BCB0; Sat, 9 May 2026 00:43:13 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1778287393; bh=HPCGeWyV6//s0b3Spt2whRmbIin4/wMGdnJC6EtPgXM=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=ZZjWqzNitIkSeOGo4WRNu/w9z+vgSqlbADIoSx7PDzKzecBFtpDT2JcKd0ksqbgls R6pqVA1CpIsVuP03HMl5zgg5fNJvr6rS8ikj2NjCc7F6WB0gSuWuBBYNPoNMvc7y8n yQhW9MYU56QproObHId9FHbepRnbHAmG99n6XgIwaPf24u3XrjOPJYHmeJXYZ0z9tK sEuFzD2xU+WR6i+be+TkWG14VpejDBfjXZnbv09SGEt658yidXez3la3b5tpJU8M5W TKAnGN0i9Q9K1M59XsqQFCsQytfyLxBf0CCgYBwOH306Vr9PN7iALYf6CG8VHmT+SV PKnA0Qm574Wrg== Received: by finisterre.sirena.org.uk (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 5B9BE1AC5896; Sat, 09 May 2026 01:43:11 +0100 (BST) Date: Sat, 9 May 2026 09:43:11 +0900 From: Mark Brown To: Mark Rutland Cc: Marc Zyngier , Joey Gouly , Catalin Marinas , Suzuki K Poulose , Will Deacon , Paolo Bonzini , Jonathan Corbet , Shuah Khan , Oliver Upton , Dave Martin , Fuad Tabba , Ben Horgan , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, kvmarm@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, Peter Maydell , Eric Auger Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 01/30] arm64/sysreg: Update SMIDR_EL1 to DDI0601 2025-06 Message-ID: References: <20260306-kvm-arm64-sme-v10-0-43f7683a0fb7@kernel.org> <20260306-kvm-arm64-sme-v10-1-43f7683a0fb7@kernel.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: kvm@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="QBKsP9LRgF0qgj1C" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Cookie: Truckers welcome. --QBKsP9LRgF0qgj1C Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Fri, May 08, 2026 at 06:12:01PM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote: > On Fri, Mar 06, 2026 at 05:00:53PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote: > > Update the definition of SMIDR_EL1 in the sysreg definition to reflect the > > information in DD0601 2025-06. This includes somewhat more generic ways of > > describing the sharing of SMCUs, more information on supported priorities > > and provides additional resolution for describing affinity groups. > FWIW, these are all in ARM DDI 0487 M.b: > https://developer.arm.com/documentation/ddi0487/mb/ > Is anything later in the series going to depend on these fields, or > would everything behave correctly with the existing RES0 field > definitions? We're exposing the affinity fields so there's a build time issue. > > +Field 55:52 HIP > Reading the ARM ARM, HIP is arguably a backwards-incompatible change. Yes, I belive people are aware. > Do we expect to expose that to VMs, or just hide priorities entirely? I > suspect we probably want to require that the guest sees > SMIDR_EL1.SMPS==0, and not care about any of that. Currently we're not exposing priority support to guests so we don't need to worry about it yet. --QBKsP9LRgF0qgj1C Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAABCgAdFiEEreZoqmdXGLWf4p/qJNaLcl1Uh9AFAmn+gx4ACgkQJNaLcl1U h9DG9wf/atoXOD+Q4rBXZr/5pU35q0IY0RT80qYAD286LVTpuZzb4OEYmgficcC1 5YV6dn24FMPHx6UaFRfPwUwmpCcaBuO178qwscXpiqYpstrydR+RidVwPsZQOkcg 8Ywr4fiHu1gGJhcQnPiWsdBn1BUexLlPUTrQh6vImj72qKbY90oFWWOwNHsozRVi FCSgFQIAu+fadSMVPalMQ6oLvMAPgDOR1Ftf2tXqsT/mq1R4o8OVodUhvEDUPzAp XP1i04j7KwajjAa2KCzkFkQAP2s1fEtoA5TAIdsuZysuE0S7tCjG+/u8owxMM/cC nO2dCJ6SojWEo41t+pH9V5nD+k0P4w== =0S3n -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --QBKsP9LRgF0qgj1C--