From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Marc Zyngier Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64/kvm: Add generic v8 KVM target Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2015 18:52:20 +0100 Message-ID: <559185D4.7060308@arm.com> References: <1434531646-4873-1-git-send-email-suzuki.poulose@arm.com> <558A6A84.5020603@arm.com> <20150624085128.GA22785@cbox> <558A7936.7020109@arm.com> <20150625123034.GE28244@cbox> <558BF6C9.3000009@arm.com> <558C05A9.8080201@arm.com> <20150626095318.GG28244@cbox> <559180CA.3050905@arm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Peter Maydell Cc: "Chalamarla, Tirumalesh" , Christoffer Dall , kvm-devel , "timur@codeaurora.org" , "vgandhi@codeaurora.org" , "kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu" , arm-mail-list List-Id: kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu On 29/06/15 18:38, Peter Maydell wrote: > On 29 June 2015 at 18:30, Marc Zyngier wrote: >> On 29/06/15 18:13, Chalamarla, Tirumalesh wrote: >>> Will this also prevents migrating between same implementations, >>> if no how is this identified. >> >> This shouldn't. It is pretty easy to look at the incoming guest's MIDR, >> and verify that it matches the default MIDR on the receiving system. Any >> difference, and the migration should abort. > > Do you really want to forbid migration between (say) > Cortex-A57 r3p0 and Cortex-A57 r3p1 ? > > That seems pretty harsh. I think we may need to allow for some flexibility (same major version only, or +/- 1 minor version...). The idea I'm trying to convey is that with "generic CPI", migration is not guaranteed unless we're on extremely similar hardware. M. -- Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...