From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christoffer Dall Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 0/11] arm/arm64: vgic: Implement API for vGICv3 live migration Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2016 20:51:36 +0100 Message-ID: <20161128195136.GI18170@cbox> References: <1479906118-15832-1-git-send-email-vijay.kilari@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mm01.cs.columbia.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4548B40664 for ; Mon, 28 Nov 2016 14:50:54 -0500 (EST) Received: from mm01.cs.columbia.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mm01.cs.columbia.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4txRCplQbjWt for ; Mon, 28 Nov 2016 14:50:53 -0500 (EST) Received: from mail-lf0-f45.google.com (mail-lf0-f45.google.com [209.85.215.45]) by mm01.cs.columbia.edu (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1119F405C4 for ; Mon, 28 Nov 2016 14:50:52 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-lf0-f45.google.com with SMTP id b14so104885923lfg.2 for ; Mon, 28 Nov 2016 11:51:40 -0800 (PST) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1479906118-15832-1-git-send-email-vijay.kilari@gmail.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: kvmarm-bounces@lists.cs.columbia.edu Sender: kvmarm-bounces@lists.cs.columbia.edu To: vijay.kilari@gmail.com Cc: marc.zyngier@arm.com, Vijaya Kumar K , kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu Hi Vijaya, On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 06:31:47PM +0530, vijay.kilari@gmail.com wrote: > From: Vijaya Kumar K > > This patchset adds API for saving and restoring > of VGICv3 registers to support live migration with new vgic feature. > This API definition is as per version of VGICv3 specification > Documentation/virtual/kvm/devices/arm-vgic-v3.txt > > The patch 3 & 4 are picked from the Pavel's previous implementation. > http://www.spinics.net/lists/kvm/msg122040.html > > NOTE: Only compilation tested for AArch32. No hardware to test. I did not review the 32-bit part, because if you cannot test it, I don't think we should merge it. I just want clarity on what happens if someone tries to use this on 32-bit, and I want to make sure it fails gracefully. Thanks, -Christoffer