From: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com>
To: "Aneesh Kumar K.V (Arm)" <aneesh.kumar@kernel.org>
Cc: <linux-coco@lists.linux.dev>, <kvmarm@lists.linux.dev>,
<linux-pci@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
<aik@amd.com>, <lukas@wunner.de>,
Samuel Ortiz <sameo@rivosinc.com>,
Xu Yilun <yilun.xu@linux.intel.com>,
Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ziepe.ca>,
"Suzuki K Poulose" <Suzuki.Poulose@arm.com>,
Steven Price <steven.price@arm.com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@linux.dev>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v1 13/38] coco: host: arm64: Create a PDEV with rmm
Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2025 13:39:59 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250730133959.0000051b@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250728135216.48084-14-aneesh.kumar@kernel.org>
On Mon, 28 Jul 2025 19:21:50 +0530
"Aneesh Kumar K.V (Arm)" <aneesh.kumar@kernel.org> wrote:
> Create the realm physical device with RMM.
>
> Signed-off-by: Aneesh Kumar K.V (Arm) <aneesh.kumar@kernel.org>
Hi Aneesh,
Various small things inline.
Jonathan
> ---
> arch/arm64/include/asm/rmi_cmds.h | 31 +++++
> arch/arm64/include/asm/rmi_smc.h | 72 ++++++++++-
> drivers/virt/coco/arm-cca-host/Makefile | 2 +-
> drivers/virt/coco/arm-cca-host/arm-cca.c | 10 +-
> drivers/virt/coco/arm-cca-host/rmm-da.c | 150 +++++++++++++++++++++++
> drivers/virt/coco/arm-cca-host/rmm-da.h | 5 +
> 6 files changed, 267 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> create mode 100644 drivers/virt/coco/arm-cca-host/rmm-da.c
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/rmi_cmds.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/rmi_cmds.h
> index ef53147c1984..f0817bd3bab4 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/rmi_cmds.h
> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/rmi_cmds.h
> @@ -505,4 +505,35 @@ static inline int rmi_rtt_unmap_unprotected(unsigned long rd,
> return res.a0;
> }
>
> +static inline unsigned long rmi_pdev_aux_count(unsigned long flags, u64 *aux_count)
> +{
> + struct arm_smccc_res res;
> +
> + arm_smccc_1_1_invoke(SMC_RMI_PDEV_AUX_COUNT, flags, &res);
> +
> + *aux_count = res.a1;
> + return res.a0;
> +}
> +
> +static inline unsigned long rmi_pdev_create(unsigned long pdev_phys,
> + unsigned long pdev_params_phys)
> +{
> + struct arm_smccc_res res;
> +
> + arm_smccc_1_1_invoke(SMC_RMI_PDEV_CREATE,
> + pdev_phys, pdev_params_phys, &res);
> +
> + return res.a0;
> +}
> +
> +static inline unsigned long rmi_pdev_get_state(unsigned long pdev_phys, unsigned long *state)
I'd use the enum for the state type and range check in here.
> +{
> + struct arm_smccc_res res;
> +
> + arm_smccc_1_1_invoke(SMC_RMI_PDEV_GET_STATE, pdev_phys, &res);
> +
> + *state = res.a1;
> + return res.a0;
> +}
> +
> #endif /* __ASM_RMI_CMDS_H */
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/rmi_smc.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/rmi_smc.h
> index 42708d500048..a84ed61e5001 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/rmi_smc.h
> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/rmi_smc.h
> @@ -26,7 +26,7 @@
> #define SMC_RMI_DATA_CREATE SMC_RMI_CALL(0x0153)
> #define SMC_RMI_DATA_CREATE_UNKNOWN SMC_RMI_CALL(0x0154)
> #define SMC_RMI_DATA_DESTROY SMC_RMI_CALL(0x0155)
> -
Probably keep
> +#define SMC_RMI_PDEV_AUX_COUNT SMC_RMI_CALL(0x0156)
and add one here as different groups.
> #define SMC_RMI_REALM_ACTIVATE SMC_RMI_CALL(0x0157)
> #define SMC_RMI_REALM_CREATE SMC_RMI_CALL(0x0158)
> #define SMC_RMI_REALM_DESTROY SMC_RMI_CALL(0x0159)
> @@ -47,6 +47,9 @@
> #define SMC_RMI_RTT_INIT_RIPAS SMC_RMI_CALL(0x0168)
> #define SMC_RMI_RTT_SET_RIPAS SMC_RMI_CALL(0x0169)
>
> +#define SMC_RMI_PDEV_CREATE SMC_RMI_CALL(0x0176)
> +#define SMC_RMI_PDEV_GET_STATE SMC_RMI_CALL(0x0178)
> +
> #define RMI_ABI_MAJOR_VERSION 1
> #define RMI_ABI_MINOR_VERSION 0
>
> @@ -268,4 +271,71 @@ struct rec_run {
> struct rec_exit exit;
> };
>
> +enum rmi_pdev_state {
Type never used, but I think it should be. See above.
> + RMI_PDEV_NEW,
> + RMI_PDEV_NEEDS_KEY,
> + RMI_PDEV_HAS_KEY,
> + RMI_PDEV_READY,
Seems someone put another state in here, but I guess you'll update
when the rest of the stack catches up.
RMI_PDEV_IDE_RESETTING,
Maybe throw a comment here for now.
> + RMI_PDEV_COMMUNICATING,
> + RMI_PDEV_STOPPING,
> + RMI_PDEV_STOPPED,
> + RMI_PDEV_ERROR,
> +};
> +
> +#define MAX_PDEV_AUX_GRANULES 32
> +#define MAX_IOCOH_ADDR_RANGE 16
> +#define MAX_FCOH_ADDR_RANGE 4
> +
> +#define RMI_PDEV_SPDM_TRUE BIT(0)
> +#define RMI_PDEV_IDE_TRUE BIT(1)
> +#define RMI_PDEV_FOCOH BIT(2)
> +#define RMI_PDEV_P2P_STREAM BIT(3)
I'd stick flags in the name (assuming this is
RmiPDevFlags? I'm not sure as the spec I could
find has different usages other after BIT(!))
> +
> +#define RMI_HASH_SHA_256 0
> +#define RMI_HASH_SHA_512 1
> +
> +struct rmi_pdev_addr_range {
> + unsigned long base;
> + unsigned long top;
Whilst we only care about platforms where this is u64, maybe
just make that explicit so we can trivially see this
matches the spec?
> +};
> +
> +struct rmi_pdev_params {
Reference? Looks like B4.4.25 RmiPdevParams type
in alp15. Though as there are some fields missing
I guess this chagned.
> + union {
> + struct {
> + u64 flags;
> + u64 pdev_id;
> + u64 segment_id;
> + u64 ecam_addr;
> + u64 root_id;
> + u64 cert_id;
> + u64 rid_base;
> + u64 rid_top;
> + u64 hash_algo;
> + u64 num_aux;
> + u64 ide_sid;
Called ncoh_ide_side in the alpha 15. Maybe match that unless
it is changing name in future version.
> + u64 ncoh_num_addr_range;
> + u64 coh_num_addr_range;
> + };
> + u8 padding1[0x100];
> + };
> +
> + union { /* 0x100 */
> + u64 aux_granule[MAX_PDEV_AUX_GRANULES];
> + u8 padding2[0x100];
> + };
> +
> + union { /* 0x200 */
> + struct {
> + struct rmi_pdev_addr_range ncoh_addr_range[MAX_IOCOH_ADDR_RANGE];
> + };
> + u8 padding3[0x100];
> + };
> + union { /* 0x300 */
> + struct {
> + struct rmi_pdev_addr_range coh_addr_range[MAX_FCOH_ADDR_RANGE];
> + };
> + u8 padding4[0x100];
> + };
Maybe pad out the rest? Mostly so we can see here that it is 4k.
> +};
> +
> #endif /* __ASM_RMI_SMC_H */
> diff --git a/drivers/virt/coco/arm-cca-host/arm-cca.c b/drivers/virt/coco/arm-cca-host/arm-cca.c
> index c8b0e6db1f47..84d97dd41191 100644
> --- a/drivers/virt/coco/arm-cca-host/arm-cca.c
> +++ b/drivers/virt/coco/arm-cca-host/arm-cca.c
> @@ -124,7 +124,15 @@ static int cca_tsm_connect(struct pci_dev *pdev)
> rc = tsm_ide_stream_register(pdev, ide);
> if (rc)
> goto err_tsm;
> -
Tidy up. I'd leave it.
> + /*
> + * Take a module reference so that we won't call unregister
> + * without rme_unasign_device
> + */
> + if (!try_module_get(THIS_MODULE)) {
> + rc = -ENXIO;
> + goto err_tsm;
> + }
> + rme_asign_device(pdev);
> /*
> * Once ide is setup enable the stream at endpoint
> * Root port will be done by RMM
> diff --git a/drivers/virt/coco/arm-cca-host/rmm-da.c b/drivers/virt/coco/arm-cca-host/rmm-da.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000000..426e530ac182
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/drivers/virt/coco/arm-cca-host/rmm-da.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,150 @@
> +
> +static int init_pdev_params(struct pci_dev *pdev, struct rmi_pdev_params *params)
> +{
> + void *aux;
Probably makes sense to reduce scope of aux to within the loop.
> + int rid, ret, i;
> + phys_addr_t aux_phys;
> + struct cca_host_dsc_pf0 *dsc_pf0;
> + struct pci_dev *rp = pcie_find_root_port(pdev);
Only used in one place for now anyway. Probably better
to move it down there.
> + struct pci_config_window *cfg = pdev->bus->sysdata;
> +
> + dsc_pf0 = to_cca_dsc_pf0(pdev);
I'd do that at declaration. Seems little advantage in doing it
down here.
> + /* assign the ep device with RMM */
> + rid = pci_dev_id(pdev);
> + params->pdev_id = rid;
> + /* slot number for certificate chain */
> + params->cert_id = 0;
> + /* io coherent spdm/ide and non p2p */
> + params->flags = RMI_PDEV_SPDM_TRUE | RMI_PDEV_IDE_TRUE;
> + params->ide_sid = dsc_pf0->sel_stream->stream_id;
> + params->hash_algo = RMI_HASH_SHA_256;
> + /* use the rid and MMIO resources of the epdev */
Spell out epdev or associate it with the pdev here more clearly.
> + params->rid_top = params->rid_base = rid;
> + params->ecam_addr = cfg->res.start;
> + params->root_id = pci_dev_id(rp);
params->root_id = pci_dev_id(pcie_find_root_port(pdev));
to me acts as better documentation fo what is going on than using
the local variable rp.
> +
> + params->ncoh_num_addr_range = pci_res_to_pdev_addr(params->ncoh_addr_range,
> + ARRAY_SIZE(params->ncoh_addr_range),
> + pdev->resource,
> + DEVICE_COUNT_RESOURCE);
> +
> + rmi_pdev_aux_count(params->flags, ¶ms->num_aux);
> + pr_debug("%s using %ld pdev aux granules\n", __func__, (unsigned long)params->num_aux);
> + dsc_pf0->num_aux = params->num_aux;
> + for (i = 0; i < params->num_aux; i++) {
void *aux = (void *)__get_free_page(GFP_KERNEL);
> + aux = (void *)__get_free_page(GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (!aux) {
> + ret = -ENOMEM;
> + goto err_free_aux;
> + }
> +
> + aux_phys = virt_to_phys(aux);
> + if (rmi_granule_delegate(aux_phys)) {
> + ret = -ENXIO;
> + free_page((unsigned long)aux);
> + goto err_free_aux;
> + }
> + params->aux_granule[i] = aux_phys;
> + dsc_pf0->aux[i] = aux;
> + }
> + return 0;
> +
> +err_free_aux:
> + free_aux_pages(i, dsc_pf0->aux[i]);
I think you want
free_aux_pages(i, dsc_pf0->aux);
Assuming this is supposed to unwind the loop above.
> + return -ENOMEM;
> +}
> +
Trivial: Single line probably fine here.
> +
> +int rme_asign_device(struct pci_dev *pci_dev)
> +{
> + int ret;
> + void *rmm_pdev;
> + unsigned long state;
> + phys_addr_t rmm_pdev_phys;
> + struct rmi_pdev_params *params;
> + struct cca_host_dsc_pf0 *dsc_pf0;
> +
> + dsc_pf0 = to_cca_dsc_pf0(pci_dev);
Might as well save a line with
struct cca_host_dsc_pf0 *dsc_pf0 = to_cca_dsc_pf0(pci_dev);
> + rmm_pdev = (void *)get_zeroed_page(GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (!rmm_pdev) {
> + ret = -ENOMEM;
return -ENOMEM;
> + goto err_out;
> + }
> +
> + rmm_pdev_phys = virt_to_phys(rmm_pdev);
> + if (rmi_granule_delegate(rmm_pdev_phys)) {
> + ret = -ENXIO;
> + goto err_free_pdev;
> + }
> +
> + params = (struct rmi_pdev_params *)get_zeroed_page(GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (!params) {
> + ret = -ENOMEM;
> + goto err_granule_undelegate;
> + }
> +
> + ret = init_pdev_params(pci_dev, params);
> + if (ret)
> + goto err_free_params;
> +
> + ret = rmi_pdev_create(rmm_pdev_phys, virt_to_phys(params));
> + pr_info("rmi_pdev_create(0x%llx, 0x%llx): %d\n", rmm_pdev_phys, virt_to_phys(params), ret);
RFC, but even so I'd demote to debug and use dynamic debug stuff to enable
them for your testing.
> + if (ret)
> + goto err_free_aux;
> +
> + rmi_pdev_get_state(rmm_pdev_phys, &state);
> + if (state != RMI_PDEV_NEW)
> + goto err_free_aux;
Nothing to unwind in rmi_pdev_create()? We've told the
RMM about it then we blow away it's resources. Seems unwise!
Maybe this is cleaned up elsewhere but if so a comment is
probably good.
> +
> + dsc_pf0->rmm_pdev = rmm_pdev;
> + free_page((unsigned long)params);
> + return 0;
> +
> +err_free_aux:
> + free_aux_pages(dsc_pf0->num_aux, dsc_pf0->aux);
> +err_free_params:
> + free_page((unsigned long)params);
> +err_granule_undelegate:
> + rmi_granule_undelegate(rmm_pdev_phys);
> +err_free_pdev:
> + free_page((unsigned long)rmm_pdev);
> +err_out:
One of my favourite nitpicks. Why not just return if nothing to do?
That tends to save a reviewer a bit of scrolling when checking
error paths do correct unwinding.
> + return ret;
> +}
> diff --git a/drivers/virt/coco/arm-cca-host/rmm-da.h b/drivers/virt/coco/arm-cca-host/rmm-da.h
> index 840cb584acdd..179ba68f2430 100644
> --- a/drivers/virt/coco/arm-cca-host/rmm-da.h
> +++ b/drivers/virt/coco/arm-cca-host/rmm-da.h
> @@ -14,6 +14,10 @@
> struct cca_host_dsc_pf0 {
> struct pci_tsm_pf0 pci;
> struct pci_ide *sel_stream;
> +
> + void *rmm_pdev;
> + int num_aux;
> + void *aux[MAX_PDEV_AUX_GRANULES];
> };
>
> static inline struct cca_host_dsc_pf0 *to_cca_dsc_pf0(struct pci_dev *pdev)
> @@ -26,4 +30,5 @@ static inline struct cca_host_dsc_pf0 *to_cca_dsc_pf0(struct pci_dev *pdev)
> return container_of(tsm, struct cca_host_dsc_pf0, pci.tsm);
> }
>
> +int rme_asign_device(struct pci_dev *pdev);
> #endif
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-07-30 12:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 158+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-07-28 13:51 [RFC PATCH v1 00/38] ARM CCA Device Assignment support Aneesh Kumar K.V (Arm)
2025-07-28 13:51 ` [RFC PATCH v1 01/38] tsm: Add tsm_bind/unbind helpers Aneesh Kumar K.V (Arm)
2025-07-28 13:51 ` [RFC PATCH v1 02/38] tsm: Move tsm core outside the host directory Aneesh Kumar K.V (Arm)
2025-07-28 13:51 ` [RFC PATCH v1 03/38] tsm: Move dsm_dev from pci_tdi to pci_tsm Aneesh Kumar K.V (Arm)
2025-08-04 21:52 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2025-08-05 9:24 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2025-07-28 13:51 ` [RFC PATCH v1 04/38] tsm: Support DMA Allocation from private memory Aneesh Kumar K.V (Arm)
2025-07-28 14:33 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-07-29 8:23 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2025-07-29 14:33 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-07-30 10:09 ` Suzuki K Poulose
2025-07-31 12:17 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-07-31 13:48 ` Suzuki K Poulose
2025-07-31 16:44 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-08-01 9:30 ` Suzuki K Poulose
2025-08-01 14:53 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-08-02 8:44 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2025-08-02 13:41 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-08-04 6:58 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2025-08-05 15:54 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-08-05 10:22 ` Alexey Kardashevskiy
2025-08-05 16:08 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-08-04 21:54 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2025-07-28 13:51 ` [RFC PATCH v1 05/38] tsm: Don't overload connect Aneesh Kumar K.V (Arm)
2025-08-04 22:00 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2025-07-28 13:51 ` [RFC PATCH v1 06/38] iommufd: Add and option to request for bar mapping with IORESOURCE_EXCLUSIVE Aneesh Kumar K.V (Arm)
2025-07-28 14:08 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-07-29 8:28 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2025-07-29 14:29 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-07-30 6:55 ` Xu Yilun
2025-07-31 12:22 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-08-05 2:26 ` Xu Yilun
2025-08-05 16:10 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-07-30 6:43 ` Xu Yilun
2025-08-06 21:18 ` dan.j.williams
2025-07-28 13:51 ` [RFC PATCH v1 07/38] iommufd/viommu: Add support to associate viommu with kvm instance Aneesh Kumar K.V (Arm)
2025-07-28 14:10 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-07-29 8:30 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2025-07-29 16:26 ` Jonathan Cameron
2025-07-29 23:16 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-07-28 13:51 ` [RFC PATCH v1 08/38] iommufd/tsm: Add tsm_op iommufd ioctls Aneesh Kumar K.V (Arm)
2025-07-29 16:34 ` Jonathan Cameron
2025-08-02 9:03 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2025-08-04 22:25 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2025-07-28 13:51 ` [RFC PATCH v1 09/38] iommufd/vdevice: Add TSM Guest request uAPI Aneesh Kumar K.V (Arm)
2025-08-04 22:03 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2025-07-28 13:51 ` [RFC PATCH v1 10/38] iommufd/vdevice: Add TSM map ioctl Aneesh Kumar K.V (Arm)
2025-07-28 14:17 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-07-29 8:37 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2025-07-29 14:31 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-08-04 2:32 ` Alexey Kardashevskiy
2025-08-04 8:28 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2025-08-05 1:29 ` Alexey Kardashevskiy
2025-08-05 15:48 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-07-28 13:51 ` [RFC PATCH v1 11/38] KVM: arm64: CCA: register host tsm platform device Aneesh Kumar K.V (Arm)
2025-07-29 17:10 ` Jonathan Cameron
2025-07-29 23:19 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-07-30 8:42 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2025-07-30 10:38 ` Jonathan Cameron
2025-07-30 12:23 ` Jonathan Cameron
2025-07-30 13:07 ` Greg KH
2025-07-31 12:11 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-07-31 13:22 ` Jonathan Cameron
2025-07-31 16:46 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-08-01 8:31 ` Greg KH
2025-08-02 0:54 ` dan.j.williams
2025-07-28 13:51 ` [RFC PATCH v1 12/38] coco: host: arm64: CCA host platform device driver Aneesh Kumar K.V (Arm)
2025-07-29 17:22 ` Jonathan Cameron
2025-07-29 23:22 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-07-30 10:28 ` Jonathan Cameron
2025-07-31 12:26 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-07-30 8:58 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2025-07-30 10:25 ` Jonathan Cameron
2025-07-28 13:51 ` [RFC PATCH v1 13/38] coco: host: arm64: Create a PDEV with rmm Aneesh Kumar K.V (Arm)
2025-07-30 12:39 ` Jonathan Cameron [this message]
2025-08-02 10:54 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2025-07-31 11:47 ` Arto Merilainen
2025-08-02 10:57 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2025-08-04 22:28 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2025-07-28 13:51 ` [RFC PATCH v1 14/38] coco: host: arm64: Device communication support Aneesh Kumar K.V (Arm)
2025-07-30 13:52 ` Jonathan Cameron
2025-07-31 12:28 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-08-04 4:17 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2025-08-04 22:29 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2025-07-28 13:51 ` [RFC PATCH v1 15/38] coco: host: arm64: Stop and destroy the physical device Aneesh Kumar K.V (Arm)
2025-07-30 13:57 ` Jonathan Cameron
2025-08-04 4:22 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2025-07-28 13:51 ` [RFC PATCH v1 16/38] X.509: Make certificate parser public Aneesh Kumar K.V (Arm)
2025-07-28 13:51 ` [RFC PATCH v1 17/38] X.509: Parse Subject Alternative Name in certificates Aneesh Kumar K.V (Arm)
2025-07-28 13:51 ` [RFC PATCH v1 18/38] X.509: Move certificate length retrieval into new helper Aneesh Kumar K.V (Arm)
2025-08-04 22:27 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2025-07-28 13:51 ` [RFC PATCH v1 19/38] coco: host: arm64: set_pubkey support Aneesh Kumar K.V (Arm)
2025-07-30 14:08 ` Jonathan Cameron
2025-08-04 4:29 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2025-08-04 22:26 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2025-07-28 13:51 ` [RFC PATCH v1 20/38] coco: host: arm64: Add support for creating a virtual device Aneesh Kumar K.V (Arm)
2025-07-30 14:12 ` Jonathan Cameron
2025-07-28 13:51 ` [RFC PATCH v1 21/38] coco: host: arm64: Add support for virtual device communication Aneesh Kumar K.V (Arm)
2025-07-30 14:13 ` Jonathan Cameron
2025-08-04 4:45 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2025-07-28 13:51 ` [RFC PATCH v1 22/38] coco: host: arm64: Stop and destroy virtual device Aneesh Kumar K.V (Arm)
2025-07-30 14:15 ` Jonathan Cameron
2025-07-28 13:52 ` [RFC PATCH v1 23/38] coco: guest: arm64: Update arm CCA guest driver Aneesh Kumar K.V (Arm)
2025-07-30 14:22 ` Jonathan Cameron
2025-07-31 12:29 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-07-31 13:54 ` Jonathan Cameron
2025-07-28 13:52 ` [RFC PATCH v1 24/38] arm64: CCA: Register guest tsm callback Aneesh Kumar K.V (Arm)
2025-07-30 14:26 ` Jonathan Cameron
2025-08-04 4:50 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2025-07-28 13:52 ` [RFC PATCH v1 25/38] cca: guest: arm64: Realm device lock support Aneesh Kumar K.V (Arm)
2025-07-30 14:32 ` Jonathan Cameron
2025-07-28 13:52 ` [RFC PATCH v1 26/38] KVM: arm64: Add exit handler related to device assignment Aneesh Kumar K.V (Arm)
2025-07-30 14:35 ` Jonathan Cameron
2025-07-28 13:52 ` [RFC PATCH v1 27/38] coco: host: arm64: add RSI_RDEV_GET_INSTANCE_ID related exit handler Aneesh Kumar K.V (Arm)
2025-07-28 13:52 ` [RFC PATCH v1 28/38] coco: host: arm64: Add support for device communication " Aneesh Kumar K.V (Arm)
2025-07-28 13:52 ` [RFC PATCH v1 29/38] coco: guest: arm64: Add support for collecting interface reports Aneesh Kumar K.V (Arm)
2025-07-28 13:52 ` [RFC PATCH v1 30/38] coco: host: arm64: Add support for realm host interface (RHI) Aneesh Kumar K.V (Arm)
2025-07-30 14:43 ` Jonathan Cameron
2025-07-28 13:52 ` [RFC PATCH v1 31/38] coco: guest: arm64: Add support for fetching interface report and certificate chain from host Aneesh Kumar K.V (Arm)
2025-07-30 14:46 ` Jonathan Cameron
2025-07-28 13:52 ` [RFC PATCH v1 32/38] coco: guest: arm64: Add support for guest initiated TDI bind/unbind Aneesh Kumar K.V (Arm)
2025-07-30 14:51 ` Jonathan Cameron
2025-08-04 22:28 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2025-07-28 13:52 ` [RFC PATCH v1 33/38] KVM: arm64: CCA: handle dev mem map/unmap Aneesh Kumar K.V (Arm)
2025-07-28 13:52 ` [RFC PATCH v1 34/38] coco: guest: arm64: Validate mmio range found in the interface report Aneesh Kumar K.V (Arm)
2025-07-30 15:06 ` Jonathan Cameron
2025-07-31 11:39 ` Arto Merilainen
2025-07-31 16:53 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-08-04 6:37 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2025-08-04 8:27 ` Arto Merilainen
2025-08-04 22:31 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2025-07-28 13:52 ` [RFC PATCH v1 35/38] coco: guest: arm64: Add Realm device start and stop support Aneesh Kumar K.V (Arm)
2025-07-31 10:40 ` Jonathan Cameron
2025-08-04 22:27 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2025-07-28 13:52 ` [RFC PATCH v1 36/38] KVM: arm64: CCA: enable DA in realm create parameters Aneesh Kumar K.V (Arm)
2025-08-04 22:31 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2025-07-28 13:52 ` [RFC PATCH v1 37/38] coco: guest: arm64: Add support for fetching device measurements Aneesh Kumar K.V (Arm)
2025-07-31 10:16 ` Jonathan Cameron
2025-08-04 22:27 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2025-07-28 13:52 ` [RFC PATCH v1 38/38] coco: guest: arm64: Add support for fetching device info Aneesh Kumar K.V (Arm)
2025-07-31 10:36 ` Jonathan Cameron
2025-08-04 6:48 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2025-08-04 10:23 ` Jonathan Cameron
2025-08-08 23:37 ` Eric Biggers
2025-07-30 16:03 ` [RFC PATCH v1 00/38] ARM CCA Device Assignment support Jason Gunthorpe
2025-08-01 2:07 ` dan.j.williams
2025-08-01 15:51 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-08-01 21:19 ` dan.j.williams
2025-08-02 14:17 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-08-02 23:50 ` dan.j.williams
2025-08-03 22:26 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-08-05 5:07 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2025-08-05 17:27 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-08-05 18:27 ` dan.j.williams
2025-08-05 18:42 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-08-05 19:06 ` dan.j.williams
2025-08-05 19:38 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-08-05 4:50 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
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=20250730133959.0000051b@huawei.com \
--to=jonathan.cameron@huawei.com \
--cc=Suzuki.Poulose@arm.com \
--cc=aik@amd.com \
--cc=aneesh.kumar@kernel.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=jgg@ziepe.ca \
--cc=kvmarm@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=linux-coco@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lukas@wunner.de \
--cc=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=oliver.upton@linux.dev \
--cc=sameo@rivosinc.com \
--cc=steven.price@arm.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
--cc=yilun.xu@linux.intel.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).