From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.5 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C7FBBC2BA2B for ; Fri, 10 Apr 2020 12:02:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9DC442082D for ; Fri, 10 Apr 2020 12:02:48 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lists.infradead.org header.i=@lists.infradead.org header.b="lObrqn7r"; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="XRevdh9H" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 9DC442082D Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-arm-kernel-bounces+infradead-linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20170209; h=Sender: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:Cc:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post: List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:References: Message-ID:Subject:To:From:Date:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description: Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID: List-Owner; bh=MOlFTd+pskPw+E1ZzD57s6aItTnSWd8l1++94yNRs+0=; b=lObrqn7rzqrwo6 iTo8C9Da3hWoohm0IDTu+t+34Qq8w48LTgs/YLzP9Kijb/rCIj2dgNcgB+TP+f/WQ1Zx2A8ekYb0w /oSckiDz91R8zqx8H1iviZNCH4zvAHDrj+1fR9kh3H+D2BQNh8jWaWR0n8ZQ/1qWtHi24XR5UmP05 AvlZWDr8H2kN3UQ4+OJOJQPsN+zEs7jRwJJES/aP/hL66AAryvWndTGpLrH2kzcrJ5/2c6PjMsn9v zP9M9ZDuZ0G4Bw18YNq8GfBchOgbsqSScd2iaoMTtXZKlRM6ES9RKcxVNCwY/Ew1bfvIab+hyUWMg IEXYCFEN1as3muFMDHig==; Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1jMsMw-00088M-1L; Fri, 10 Apr 2020 12:02:46 +0000 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1jMsMs-00087t-0Q for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Fri, 10 Apr 2020 12:02:43 +0000 Received: from willie-the-truck (236.31.169.217.in-addr.arpa [217.169.31.236]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 201EB2082D; Fri, 10 Apr 2020 12:02:38 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1586520161; bh=Nv2pXatIqD68w/N5cyB/YmKTeoXvBy/No04xylq046o=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=XRevdh9H8acoAotn70g+BQ7d6/W7dBxFNTzePAAUJyjldWcsS9Sz2S00eYzHNtZ3q B5GoBGkPxH0ljIjoIWbKhmup6Zrk3THu4mMU+vyjNZj0REK9QU2YvkSuTDdeTJTn1w jPu39iEQU76xmCBWe9M3tQxcF1v7rYGLjpTx3gow= Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2020 13:02:35 +0100 From: Will Deacon To: Hanjun Guo Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2] arm64: cpufeatures: add support for tlbi range instructions Message-ID: <20200410120235.GC24814@willie-the-truck> References: <5DC960EB.9050503@huawei.com> <20191111132716.GA9394@willie-the-truck> <5DC96660.8040505@huawei.com> <3b833c82-2c1b-462a-f06f-d4c8b373dac1@huawei.com> <20200410115446.GA24814@willie-the-truck> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200410115446.GA24814@willie-the-truck> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20200410_050242_526421_8208D00C X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 22.22 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: mark.rutland@arm.com, Rob Herring , wanghuiqiang , Anna.Chen@arm.com, Zhenyu Ye , catalin.marinas@arm.com, suzuki.poulose@arm.com, 'Matteo Carlini' , xiexiangyou@huawei.com, Linuxarm , Shaokun Zhang , tangnianyao@huawei.com, Marc Zyngier , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, qiuzhenfa@hisilicon.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+infradead-linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Fri, Apr 10, 2020 at 12:54:46PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote: > On Fri, Apr 10, 2020 at 09:43:49AM +0800, Hanjun Guo wrote: > > On 2019/11/20 9:29, Hanjun Guo wrote: > > > > > > > > I also wonder if the ARMv8.4-TTL extension (which I have patches for in > > > > the nested virt series) requires the same kind of treatment (after all, > > > > it has an implicit range based on the base granule size and level). > > > > > > > > In any way, this requires careful specification, and I don't think > > > > we can improvise this on the ML... ;-) > > > > > > Sure :), the good news is that ARM officially announced will be > > > working with Huawei again. > > > > > > So if I understand your point correctly, we need steps to take: > > > - ARM spec needs to make TIBi by range crystal clear and being > > > written down in the spec; > > > - Firmware description of supporting TLBi by range in system level > > > for both FDT and ACPI; > > > - Then upstream the code. > > > > Do we have update here? I noticed that the TLBI by rang for SMMU is > > merged for upstream from Rob, any plan or progress for the CPU side? > > > > Sorry to ping you on the mailling list, our upcoming new chip has > > this feature and it's good to enable it, so it's a bit urgent for us. > > Have you tried look at the latest version of the patches rather than > "pinging" old history? We're also in the merge window at the moment, so > please cut us some slack. > > I also fail to see the urgency. This thing is a pure performance play, and a > fairly niche one at that. I'm not especially comfortable ripping up our TLBI > code without being able to test it. Argh, so while it *is* the middle of the merge window and I do fail to see the urgency of this, I also mixed it up with the TTL series, which is the one I'm really worried about. Please post a v3 at -rc1. Will _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel