From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-yw1-f201.google.com (mail-yw1-f201.google.com [209.85.128.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 26F8A17748 for ; Thu, 15 Jun 2023 14:14:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-yw1-f201.google.com with SMTP id 00721157ae682-56ff7b4feefso27414687b3.0 for ; Thu, 15 Jun 2023 07:14:28 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20221208; t=1686838468; x=1689430468; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:from:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:in-reply-to:date:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=7viRfd/Ct8U5RrqgvCgGqBfozF7RQD4igs0DqRCL6cE=; b=N/9efvZeguJ9mTYp5uqlZJJgM9UzRYdeH+vy0nBO00FHtIhj1v5S8J8uFMHxXAdPq5 HMY7gCgct/iykDoEMY/UG1qvaS4tT96uzlhEPWL0wuon7fNHgp+8zvFR59EqaGk0IcR5 GIOIV7t4D2hGoqqUlwNaHk7O/lN3NwsHonXsFnvPwEXiapoG1W/+AS4q2pjBmrakJSVF yBuwQ8oL0P8aYozIPFw4J1XAu0B0MLnP7ZuaGljQ1bIP+UL6K+Kg4Wn6tI5ZM7QUJHq1 DHMrSnuQrFIh+FjNv6J2EzUG6FbU+pYRhEnJGAtfHyCFNX57WYLzlhP+493R4eeaCpDG TlLw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20221208; t=1686838468; x=1689430468; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:from:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:in-reply-to:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject :date:message-id:reply-to; bh=7viRfd/Ct8U5RrqgvCgGqBfozF7RQD4igs0DqRCL6cE=; b=eNbnCQrolP8nieqpZbo5oGEvPDTXY0h+yCW1l7y3FamtaS1YH+yxYOTgsMGkpMSYKx SCwDYg6zs8KHU0hWYf/sBjT6fPEl1cUK53x+GBZzxJASgo1eT19J+mLVKY9qTRWeG3KD w5D5OM7urBLa4Qhik597EnJ+Sg0LYjfBEgX8r2hyiFj8EA7hKFWAon/RiKgiq/sVamvs c1duTYC/5dKh1CzABfVtRjSr3n0Qbxe0abfo6qITha3IppesPajMte0Sjqdw8B7KyGtv FIOqcHZqQO6bCO7bmlZzxQrux2EnU7EtIDjoNM95OQ0zReVEOWLG3/VLDDKoeIh2q+HZ 57IQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AC+VfDyom3PGXqmQbbYM6kIKvZ+kcGRevbwLuulTkARxOr8xCyfTFVF0 XB/VgpdE0rLF9CeekdY0lEXeVZOmBJM= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACHHUZ6EIKcKvq/hS/fOZS8agFpvn3GY3pzYqorAftldiJlQkHc522gAG3GeNLMI7TYIN2aK4x1LHQhybZ4= X-Received: from zagreus.c.googlers.com ([fda3:e722:ac3:cc00:7f:e700:c0a8:5c37]) (user=seanjc job=sendgmr) by 2002:a81:bc0f:0:b0:56d:2abf:f0c with SMTP id a15-20020a81bc0f000000b0056d2abf0f0cmr2288100ywi.10.1686838467967; Thu, 15 Jun 2023 07:14:27 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2023 07:14:26 -0700 In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: kvmarm@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Mime-Version: 1.0 References: <20230606192858.3600174-1-rananta@google.com> Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 0/7] KVM: arm64: Add support for FEAT_TLBIRANGE From: Sean Christopherson To: Oliver Upton Cc: Raghavendra Rao Ananta , Marc Zyngier , James Morse , Suzuki K Poulose , Paolo Bonzini , Jing Zhang , Colton Lewis , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, kvmarm@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, Jun 15, 2023, Oliver Upton wrote: > +cc Sean >=20 > On Wed, Jun 14, 2023 at 06:57:01PM -0700, Raghavendra Rao Ananta wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 14, 2023 at 5:19=E2=80=AFAM Oliver Upton wrote: > > > > > > Hi Raghavendra, > > > > > > On Tue, Jun 06, 2023 at 07:28:51PM +0000, Raghavendra Rao Ananta wrot= e: > > > > The series is based off of upstream v6.4-rc2, and applied David > > > > Matlack's common API for TLB invalidations[1] on top. > > > > > > Sorry I didn't spot the dependency earlier, but this isn't helpful TB= H. > > > > > > David's series was partially applied, and what remains no longer clea= nly > > > applies to the base you suggest. Independent of that, my *strong* > > > preference is that you just send out a series containing your patches= as > > > well as David's. Coordinating dependent efforts is the only sane thin= g > > > to do. Also, those patches are 5 months old at this point which is > > > ancient history. > > > > > Would you rather prefer I detach this series from David's as I'm not > > sure what his plans are for future versions? > > On the other hand, the patches seem simple enough to rebase and give > > another shot at review, but may end up delaying this series. > > WDYT? >=20 > In cases such as this you'd typically coordinate with the other > developer to pick up their changes as part of your series. Especially > for this case -- David's refactoring is _pointless_ without another > user for that code (i.e. arm64). As fun as it might be to antagonize > Sean, that series pokes x86 and I'd like an ack from on it. >=20 > So, please post a combined series that applies cleanly to an early 6.4 > rc of your choosing, and cc all affected reviewers/maintainers. +1