From: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
To: Steven Price <steven.price@arm.com>
Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, kvmarm@lists.linux.dev,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@linux.dev>,
Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
Zenghui Yu <yuzenghui@huawei.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Joey Gouly <joey.gouly@arm.com>,
Alexandru Elisei <alexandru.elisei@arm.com>,
Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@arm.com>,
Fuad Tabba <tabba@google.com>,
linux-coco@lists.linux.dev,
Ganapatrao Kulkarni <gankulkarni@os.amperecomputing.com>,
Gavin Shan <gshan@redhat.com>,
Shanker Donthineni <sdonthineni@nvidia.com>,
Alper Gun <alpergun@google.com>,
"Aneesh Kumar K . V" <aneesh.kumar@kernel.org>,
Emi Kisanuki <fj0570is@fujitsu.com>,
Vishal Annapurve <vannapurve@google.com>,
WeiLin.Chang@arm.com, Lorenzo.Pieralisi2@arm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v14 10/44] arm64: RMI: Add support for SRO
Date: Thu, 21 May 2026 15:35:41 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <864ik0x22q.wl-maz@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260513131757.116630-11-steven.price@arm.com>
On Wed, 13 May 2026 14:17:18 +0100,
Steven Price <steven.price@arm.com> wrote:
>
> RMM v2.0 introduces the concept of "Stateful RMI Operations" (SRO). This
> means that an SMC can return with an operation still in progress. The
> host is excepted to continue the operation until is reaches a conclusion
> (either success or failure). During this process the RMM can request
> additional memory ('donate') or hand memory back to the host
> ('reclaim'). The host can request an in progress operation is cancelled,
> but still continue the operation until it has completed (otherwise the
> incomplete operation may cause future RMM operations to fail).
>
> The SRO is tracked using a struct rmi_sro_state object which keeps track
> of any memory which has been allocated but not yet consumed by the RMM
> or reclaimed from the RMM. This allows the memory to be reused in a
> future request within the same operation. It will also permit an
> operation to be done in a context where memory allocation may be
> difficult (e.g. atomic context) with the option to abort the operation
> and retry the memory allocation outside of the atomic context. The
> memory stored in the struct rmi_sro_state object can then be reused on
> the subsequent attempt.
>
> Signed-off-by: Steven Price <steven.price@arm.com>
> ---
> v14:
> * SRO support has improved although is still not fully complete. The
> infrastructure has been moved out of KVM.
> ---
> arch/arm64/include/asm/rmi_cmds.h | 1 +
> arch/arm64/kernel/rmi.c | 359 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 2 files changed, 360 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/rmi_cmds.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/rmi_cmds.h
> index eb213c8e6f26..1a7b0c8f1e38 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/rmi_cmds.h
> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/rmi_cmds.h
> @@ -35,6 +35,7 @@ struct rmi_sro_state {
>
> int rmi_delegate_range(phys_addr_t phys, unsigned long size);
> int rmi_undelegate_range(phys_addr_t phys, unsigned long size);
> +int free_delegated_page(phys_addr_t phys);
>
> static inline int rmi_delegate_page(phys_addr_t phys)
> {
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/rmi.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/rmi.c
> index 08cef54acadb..a8107ca9bb6d 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/rmi.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/rmi.c
> @@ -48,6 +48,365 @@ int rmi_undelegate_range(phys_addr_t phys, unsigned long size)
> return ret;
> }
>
> +static unsigned long donate_req_to_size(unsigned long donatereq)
> +{
> + unsigned long unit_size = RMI_DONATE_SIZE(donatereq);
> +
> + switch (unit_size) {
> + case 0:
> + return PAGE_SIZE;
> + case 1:
> + return PMD_SIZE;
> + case 2:
> + return PUD_SIZE;
> + case 3:
> + return P4D_SIZE;
How does this work when we have folded levels? If this is supposed to
be the architected size, then it should actively express that:
return BIT(unit_size * (PAGE_SHIFT - 3) + PAGE_SHIFT);
> + }
> + unreachable();
> +}
> +
> +static void rmi_smccc_invoke(struct arm_smccc_1_2_regs *regs_in,
> + struct arm_smccc_1_2_regs *regs_out)
> +{
> + struct arm_smccc_1_2_regs regs = *regs_in;
> + unsigned long status;
> +
> + do {
> + arm_smccc_1_2_invoke(®s, regs_out);
> + status = RMI_RETURN_STATUS(regs_out->a0);
> + } while (status == RMI_BUSY || status == RMI_BLOCKED);
> +}
> +
> +int free_delegated_page(phys_addr_t phys)
> +{
> + if (WARN_ON(rmi_undelegate_page(phys))) {
Please drop this WARN_ON(). Or at least make it ONCE. Everywhere.
> + /* Undelegate failed: leak the page */
> + return -EBUSY;
> + }
> +
> + free_page((unsigned long)phys_to_virt(phys));
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int rmi_sro_ensure_capacity(struct rmi_sro_state *sro,
> + unsigned long count)
> +{
> + if (WARN_ON_ONCE(sro->addr_count > RMI_MAX_ADDR_LIST))
> + return -EOVERFLOW;
> +
> + if (count > RMI_MAX_ADDR_LIST - sro->addr_count)
> + return -ENOSPC;
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int rmi_sro_donate_contig(struct rmi_sro_state *sro,
> + unsigned long sro_handle,
> + unsigned long donatereq,
> + struct arm_smccc_1_2_regs *out_regs,
> + gfp_t gfp)
> +{
> + unsigned long unit_size = RMI_DONATE_SIZE(donatereq);
> + unsigned long unit_size_bytes = donate_req_to_size(donatereq);
> + unsigned long count = RMI_DONATE_COUNT(donatereq);
> + unsigned long state = RMI_DONATE_STATE(donatereq);
> + unsigned long size = unit_size_bytes * count;
> + unsigned long addr_range;
> + int ret;
> + void *virt;
> + phys_addr_t phys;
> + struct arm_smccc_1_2_regs regs = {
> + SMC_RMI_OP_MEM_DONATE,
> + sro_handle
> + };
> +
> + for (int i = 0; i < sro->addr_count; i++) {
> + unsigned long entry = sro->addr_list[i];
> +
> + if (RMI_ADDR_RANGE_SIZE(entry) == unit_size &&
> + RMI_ADDR_RANGE_COUNT(entry) == count &&
> + RMI_ADDR_RANGE_STATE(entry) == state) {
> + sro->addr_count--;
> + swap(sro->addr_list[sro->addr_count],
> + sro->addr_list[i]);
> +
> + goto out;
> + }
> + }
> +
> + ret = rmi_sro_ensure_capacity(sro, 1);
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
> +
> + virt = alloc_pages_exact(size, gfp);
> + if (!virt)
> + return -ENOMEM;
> + phys = virt_to_phys(virt);
> +
> + if (state == RMI_OP_MEM_DELEGATED) {
> + if (rmi_delegate_range(phys, size)) {
> + free_pages_exact(virt, size);
> + return -ENXIO;
> + }
> + }
> +
> + addr_range = phys & RMI_ADDR_RANGE_ADDR_MASK;
> + FIELD_MODIFY(RMI_ADDR_RANGE_SIZE_MASK, &addr_range, unit_size);
> + FIELD_MODIFY(RMI_ADDR_RANGE_COUNT_MASK, &addr_range, count);
> + FIELD_MODIFY(RMI_ADDR_RANGE_STATE_MASK, &addr_range, state);
> +
> + sro->addr_list[sro->addr_count] = addr_range;
> +
Shouldn't this be moved to a helper that ensures capacity, and returns
an error otherwise?
> +out:
> + regs.a2 = virt_to_phys(&sro->addr_list[sro->addr_count]);
> + regs.a3 = 1;
This could really do with context specific helpers that populate regs
based on a set of parameters. I have no idea what this 1 here is, and
the init is spread over too much code. Think of the children!
That's valid for the whole patch.
M.
> + rmi_smccc_invoke(®s, out_regs);
> +
> + unsigned long donated_granules = out_regs->a1;
> + unsigned long donated_size = donated_granules << PAGE_SHIFT;
> +
> + if (donated_granules == 0) {
> + /* No pages used by the RMM */
> + sro->addr_count++;
> + } else if (donated_size < size) {
> + phys = sro->addr_list[sro->addr_count] & RMI_ADDR_RANGE_ADDR_MASK;
> +
> + /* Not all granules used by the RMM, free the remaining pages */
> + for (long i = donated_size; i < size; i += PAGE_SIZE) {
> + if (state == RMI_OP_MEM_DELEGATED)
> + free_delegated_page(phys + i);
> + else
> + __free_page(phys_to_page(phys + i));
> + }
> + }
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int rmi_sro_donate_noncontig(struct rmi_sro_state *sro,
> + unsigned long sro_handle,
> + unsigned long donatereq,
> + struct arm_smccc_1_2_regs *out_regs,
> + gfp_t gfp)
> +{
> + unsigned long unit_size = RMI_DONATE_SIZE(donatereq);
> + unsigned long unit_size_bytes = donate_req_to_size(donatereq);
> + unsigned long count = RMI_DONATE_COUNT(donatereq);
> + unsigned long state = RMI_DONATE_STATE(donatereq);
> + unsigned long found = 0;
> + unsigned long addr_list_start = sro->addr_count;
> + int ret;
> + struct arm_smccc_1_2_regs regs = {
> + SMC_RMI_OP_MEM_DONATE,
> + sro_handle
> + };
> +
> + for (int i = 0; i < addr_list_start && found < count; i++) {
> + unsigned long entry = sro->addr_list[i];
> +
> + if (RMI_ADDR_RANGE_SIZE(entry) == unit_size &&
> + RMI_ADDR_RANGE_COUNT(entry) == 1 &&
> + RMI_ADDR_RANGE_STATE(entry) == state) {
> + addr_list_start--;
> + swap(sro->addr_list[addr_list_start],
> + sro->addr_list[i]);
> + found++;
> + i--;
> + }
> + }
> +
> + ret = rmi_sro_ensure_capacity(sro, count - found);
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
> +
> + while (found < count) {
> + unsigned long addr_range;
> + void *virt = alloc_pages_exact(unit_size_bytes, gfp);
> + phys_addr_t phys;
> +
> + if (!virt)
> + return -ENOMEM;
> +
> + phys = virt_to_phys(virt);
> +
> + if (state == RMI_OP_MEM_DELEGATED) {
> + if (rmi_delegate_range(phys, unit_size_bytes)) {
> + free_pages_exact(virt, unit_size_bytes);
> + return -ENXIO;
> + }
> + }
> +
> + addr_range = phys & RMI_ADDR_RANGE_ADDR_MASK;
> + FIELD_MODIFY(RMI_ADDR_RANGE_SIZE_MASK, &addr_range, unit_size);
> + FIELD_MODIFY(RMI_ADDR_RANGE_COUNT_MASK, &addr_range, 1);
> + FIELD_MODIFY(RMI_ADDR_RANGE_STATE_MASK, &addr_range, state);
> +
> + sro->addr_list[sro->addr_count++] = addr_range;
> + found++;
> + }
> +
> + regs.a2 = virt_to_phys(&sro->addr_list[addr_list_start]);
> + regs.a3 = found;
> + rmi_smccc_invoke(®s, out_regs);
> +
> + unsigned long donated_granules = out_regs->a1;
> +
> + if (WARN_ON(donated_granules & ((unit_size_bytes >> PAGE_SHIFT) - 1))) {
> + /*
> + * FIXME: RMM has only consumed part of a huge page, this leaks
> + * the rest of the huge page
> + */
> + donated_granules = ALIGN(donated_granules,
> + (unit_size_bytes >> PAGE_SHIFT));
> + }
> + unsigned long donated_blocks = donated_granules / (unit_size_bytes >> PAGE_SHIFT);
> +
> + if (WARN_ON(donated_blocks > found))
> + donated_blocks = found;
> +
> + unsigned long undonated_blocks = found - donated_blocks;
> +
> + while (donated_blocks && undonated_blocks) {
> + sro->addr_count--;
> + swap(sro->addr_list[addr_list_start],
> + sro->addr_list[sro->addr_count]);
> + addr_list_start++;
> +
> + donated_blocks--;
> + undonated_blocks--;
> + }
> + sro->addr_count -= donated_blocks;
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int rmi_sro_donate(struct rmi_sro_state *sro,
> + unsigned long sro_handle,
> + unsigned long donatereq,
> + struct arm_smccc_1_2_regs *regs,
> + gfp_t gfp)
> +{
> + unsigned long count = RMI_DONATE_COUNT(donatereq);
> +
> + if (WARN_ON(!count))
> + return 0;
> +
> + if (RMI_DONATE_CONTIG(donatereq)) {
> + return rmi_sro_donate_contig(sro, sro_handle, donatereq,
> + regs, gfp);
> + } else {
> + return rmi_sro_donate_noncontig(sro, sro_handle, donatereq,
> + regs, gfp);
> + }
> +}
> +
> +static int rmi_sro_reclaim(struct rmi_sro_state *sro,
> + unsigned long sro_handle,
> + struct arm_smccc_1_2_regs *out_regs)
> +{
> + unsigned long capacity;
> + struct arm_smccc_1_2_regs regs;
> + int ret;
> +
> + ret = rmi_sro_ensure_capacity(sro, 1);
> + if (ret)
> + rmi_sro_free(sro);
> +
> + capacity = RMI_MAX_ADDR_LIST - sro->addr_count;
> +
> + regs = (struct arm_smccc_1_2_regs){
> + SMC_RMI_OP_MEM_RECLAIM,
> + sro_handle,
> + virt_to_phys(&sro->addr_list[sro->addr_count]),
> + capacity
> + };
> + rmi_smccc_invoke(®s, out_regs);
> +
> + if (WARN_ON_ONCE(out_regs->a1 > capacity))
> + out_regs->a1 = capacity;
> +
> + sro->addr_count += out_regs->a1;
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +void rmi_sro_free(struct rmi_sro_state *sro)
> +{
> + for (int i = 0; i < sro->addr_count; i++) {
> + unsigned long entry = sro->addr_list[i];
> + unsigned long addr = RMI_ADDR_RANGE_ADDR(entry);
> + unsigned long unit_size = RMI_ADDR_RANGE_SIZE(entry);
> + unsigned long count = RMI_ADDR_RANGE_COUNT(entry);
> + unsigned long state = RMI_ADDR_RANGE_STATE(entry);
> + unsigned long size = donate_req_to_size(unit_size) * count;
> +
> + if (state == RMI_OP_MEM_DELEGATED) {
> + if (WARN_ON(rmi_undelegate_range(addr, size))) {
> + /* Leak the pages */
> + continue;
> + }
> + }
> + free_pages_exact(phys_to_virt(addr), size);
> + }
> +
> + sro->addr_count = 0;
> +}
> +
> +unsigned long rmi_sro_execute(struct rmi_sro_state *sro, gfp_t gfp)
> +{
> + unsigned long sro_handle;
> + struct arm_smccc_1_2_regs regs;
> + struct arm_smccc_1_2_regs *regs_in = &sro->regs;
> +
> + rmi_smccc_invoke(regs_in, ®s);
> +
> + sro_handle = regs.a1;
> +
> + while (RMI_RETURN_STATUS(regs.a0) == RMI_INCOMPLETE) {
> + bool can_cancel = RMI_RETURN_CAN_CANCEL(regs.a0);
> + int ret;
> +
> + switch (RMI_RETURN_MEMREQ(regs.a0)) {
> + case RMI_OP_MEM_REQ_NONE:
> + regs = (struct arm_smccc_1_2_regs){
> + SMC_RMI_OP_CONTINUE, sro_handle, 0
> + };
> + rmi_smccc_invoke(®s, ®s);
> + break;
> + case RMI_OP_MEM_REQ_DONATE:
> + ret = rmi_sro_donate(sro, sro_handle, regs.a2, ®s,
> + gfp);
> + break;
> + case RMI_OP_MEM_REQ_RECLAIM:
> + ret = rmi_sro_reclaim(sro, sro_handle, ®s);
> + break;
> + default:
> + ret = WARN_ON(1);
> + break;
> + }
> +
> + if (ret) {
> + if (can_cancel) {
> + /*
> + * FIXME: Handle cancelling properly!
> + *
> + * If the operation has failed due to memory
> + * allocation failure then the information on
> + * the memory allocation should be saved, so
> + * that the allocation can be repeated outside
> + * of any context which prevented the
> + * allocation.
Honestly, this is the sort of stuff that I'd expect to be solved
*before* posting this code. Since this is so central to the whole
memory management, it needs to be correct from day-1.
If you can't make it work in time, then tone the supported features
down. But FIXMEs and WARN_ONs are not the way to go.
M.
--
Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-05-21 14:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 88+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-05-13 13:17 [PATCH v14 00/44] arm64: Support for Arm CCA in KVM Steven Price
2026-05-13 13:17 ` [PATCH v14 01/44] kvm: arm64: Include kvm_emulate.h in kvm/arm_psci.h Steven Price
2026-05-21 10:19 ` Marc Zyngier
2026-05-21 15:11 ` Steven Price
2026-05-13 13:17 ` [PATCH v14 02/44] kvm: arm64: Avoid including linux/kvm_host.h in kvm_pgtable.h Steven Price
2026-05-21 10:26 ` Marc Zyngier
2026-05-21 15:11 ` Steven Price
2026-05-13 13:17 ` [PATCH v14 03/44] arm64: RME: Handle Granule Protection Faults (GPFs) Steven Price
2026-05-21 12:25 ` Marc Zyngier
2026-05-21 15:15 ` Steven Price
2026-05-13 13:17 ` [PATCH v14 04/44] arm64: RMI: Add SMC definitions for calling the RMM Steven Price
2026-05-18 7:08 ` Gavin Shan
2026-05-20 16:01 ` Steven Price
2026-05-21 12:40 ` Marc Zyngier
2026-05-21 14:50 ` Suzuki K Poulose
2026-05-21 15:33 ` Steven Price
2026-05-13 13:17 ` [PATCH v14 05/44] arm64: RMI: Add wrappers for RMI calls Steven Price
2026-05-19 5:35 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2026-05-21 15:44 ` Steven Price
2026-05-21 0:21 ` Gavin Shan
2026-05-21 15:44 ` Steven Price
2026-05-21 12:49 ` Marc Zyngier
2026-05-21 15:44 ` Steven Price
2026-05-13 13:17 ` [PATCH v14 06/44] arm64: RMI: Check for RMI support at init Steven Price
2026-05-21 0:39 ` Gavin Shan
2026-05-21 15:49 ` Steven Price
2026-05-21 13:02 ` Marc Zyngier
2026-05-13 13:17 ` [PATCH v14 07/44] arm64: RMI: Configure the RMM with the host's page size Steven Price
2026-05-21 0:51 ` Gavin Shan
2026-05-21 13:30 ` Marc Zyngier
2026-05-21 14:53 ` Suzuki K Poulose
2026-05-13 13:17 ` [PATCH v14 08/44] arm64: RMI: Ensure that the RMM has GPT entries for memory Steven Price
2026-05-19 5:55 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2026-05-21 0:58 ` Gavin Shan
2026-05-21 13:47 ` Marc Zyngier
2026-05-21 14:24 ` Marc Zyngier
2026-05-21 15:39 ` Suzuki K Poulose
2026-05-13 13:17 ` [PATCH v14 09/44] arm64: RMI: Provide functions to delegate/undelegate ranges of memory Steven Price
2026-05-21 13:59 ` Marc Zyngier
2026-05-21 16:01 ` Suzuki K Poulose
2026-05-13 13:17 ` [PATCH v14 10/44] arm64: RMI: Add support for SRO Steven Price
2026-05-14 8:01 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2026-05-14 9:33 ` Steven Price
2026-05-19 6:02 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2026-05-21 4:38 ` Gavin Shan
2026-05-21 14:35 ` Marc Zyngier [this message]
2026-05-13 13:17 ` [PATCH v14 11/44] arm64: RMI: Check for RMI support at KVM init Steven Price
2026-05-13 13:17 ` [PATCH v14 12/44] arm64: RMI: Check for LPA2 support Steven Price
2026-05-13 13:17 ` [PATCH v14 13/44] arm64: RMI: Define the user ABI Steven Price
2026-05-13 13:17 ` [PATCH v14 14/44] arm64: RMI: Basic infrastructure for creating a realm Steven Price
2026-05-19 6:31 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2026-05-13 13:17 ` [PATCH v14 15/44] kvm: arm64: Don't expose unsupported capabilities for realm guests Steven Price
2026-05-13 13:17 ` [PATCH v14 16/44] KVM: arm64: Allow passing machine type in KVM creation Steven Price
2026-05-13 13:17 ` [PATCH v14 17/44] arm64: RMI: RTT tear down Steven Price
2026-05-19 6:54 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2026-05-13 13:17 ` [PATCH v14 18/44] arm64: RMI: Activate realm on first VCPU run Steven Price
2026-05-13 13:17 ` [PATCH v14 19/44] arm64: RMI: Allocate/free RECs to match vCPUs Steven Price
2026-05-13 13:17 ` [PATCH v14 20/44] arm64: RMI: Support for the VGIC in realms Steven Price
2026-05-13 13:17 ` [PATCH v14 21/44] KVM: arm64: Support timers in realm RECs Steven Price
2026-05-13 13:17 ` [PATCH v14 22/44] arm64: RMI: Handle realm enter/exit Steven Price
2026-05-13 13:17 ` [PATCH v14 23/44] arm64: RMI: Handle RMI_EXIT_RIPAS_CHANGE Steven Price
2026-05-19 9:40 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2026-05-13 13:17 ` [PATCH v14 24/44] KVM: arm64: Handle realm MMIO emulation Steven Price
2026-05-13 13:17 ` [PATCH v14 25/44] KVM: arm64: Expose support for private memory Steven Price
2026-05-13 13:17 ` [PATCH v14 26/44] arm64: RMI: Allow populating initial contents Steven Price
2026-05-13 13:17 ` [PATCH v14 27/44] arm64: RMI: Set RIPAS of initial memslots Steven Price
2026-05-19 10:02 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2026-05-19 10:13 ` Suzuki K Poulose
2026-05-19 12:55 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2026-05-19 13:06 ` Suzuki K Poulose
2026-05-13 13:17 ` [PATCH v14 28/44] arm64: RMI: Create the realm descriptor Steven Price
2026-05-13 13:17 ` [PATCH v14 29/44] arm64: RMI: Runtime faulting of memory Steven Price
2026-05-13 13:17 ` [PATCH v14 30/44] KVM: arm64: Handle realm VCPU load Steven Price
2026-05-13 13:17 ` [PATCH v14 31/44] KVM: arm64: Validate register access for a Realm VM Steven Price
2026-05-13 13:17 ` [PATCH v14 32/44] KVM: arm64: Handle Realm PSCI requests Steven Price
2026-05-13 13:17 ` [PATCH v14 33/44] KVM: arm64: WARN on injected undef exceptions Steven Price
2026-05-13 13:17 ` [PATCH v14 34/44] arm64: RMI: allow userspace to inject aborts Steven Price
2026-05-13 13:17 ` [PATCH v14 35/44] arm64: RMI: support RSI_HOST_CALL Steven Price
2026-05-13 13:17 ` [PATCH v14 36/44] arm64: RMI: Allow checking SVE on VM instance Steven Price
2026-05-13 13:17 ` [PATCH v14 37/44] arm64: RMI: Prevent Device mappings for Realms Steven Price
2026-05-19 10:25 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2026-05-13 13:17 ` [PATCH v14 38/44] arm64: RMI: Propagate number of breakpoints and watchpoints to userspace Steven Price
2026-05-13 13:17 ` [PATCH v14 39/44] arm64: RMI: Set breakpoint parameters through SET_ONE_REG Steven Price
2026-05-13 13:17 ` [PATCH v14 40/44] arm64: RMI: Propagate max SVE vector length from RMM Steven Price
2026-05-13 13:17 ` [PATCH v14 41/44] arm64: RMI: Configure max SVE vector length for a Realm Steven Price
2026-05-13 13:17 ` [PATCH v14 42/44] arm64: RMI: Provide register list for unfinalized RMI RECs Steven Price
2026-05-13 13:17 ` [PATCH v14 43/44] arm64: RMI: Provide accurate register list Steven Price
2026-05-13 13:17 ` [PATCH v14 44/44] arm64: RMI: Enable realms to be created Steven Price
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=864ik0x22q.wl-maz@kernel.org \
--to=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=Lorenzo.Pieralisi2@arm.com \
--cc=WeiLin.Chang@arm.com \
--cc=alexandru.elisei@arm.com \
--cc=alpergun@google.com \
--cc=aneesh.kumar@kernel.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=christoffer.dall@arm.com \
--cc=fj0570is@fujitsu.com \
--cc=gankulkarni@os.amperecomputing.com \
--cc=gshan@redhat.com \
--cc=james.morse@arm.com \
--cc=joey.gouly@arm.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=kvmarm@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-coco@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=oliver.upton@linux.dev \
--cc=sdonthineni@nvidia.com \
--cc=steven.price@arm.com \
--cc=suzuki.poulose@arm.com \
--cc=tabba@google.com \
--cc=vannapurve@google.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
--cc=yuzenghui@huawei.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox