From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: christoffer.dall@linaro.org (Christoffer Dall) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2017 12:43:35 +0100 Subject: [PATCH v10 8/8] arm/arm64: Documentation: Update arm-vgic-v3.txt In-Reply-To: References: <1480576187-5012-1-git-send-email-vijay.kilari@gmail.com> <1480576187-5012-9-git-send-email-vijay.kilari@gmail.com> <7d82df18-debd-72e7-af6e-3816b8aaee85@redhat.com> <20170120195722.GJ13531@cbox> <20170123112019.GC15850@cbox> Message-ID: <20170123114335.GD15850@cbox> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 05:03:55PM +0530, Vijay Kilari wrote: > On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 4:50 PM, Christoffer Dall > wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 04:22:39PM +0530, Vijay Kilari wrote: > >> Hi Christoffer, > >> > >> In the document, > >> > >> The mpidr field is used to specify which > >> redistributor is accessed. The mpidr is ignored for the distributor. > >> > >> We still rely on MPIDR for KVM_DEV_ARM_VGIC_GRP_DIST_REGS to fetch > >> vcpu info. So don't we need to remove this restriction?. > >> Or force to use vcpu[0]? > > > > Does the data we return ever change if you supply a diferent MPIDR and > > access a distributor register? If not (and I don't think it should), > > then the API is properly defined but the internal implementation should > > not rely on the value provided by user space. > > Data does not change. However the common uaccess code expects vcpu. > Just use vcpu[0] if it's not worth refactoring then. -Christoffer