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 Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [112.213.38.117]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9C85CC433EF for ; Thu, 24 Feb 2022 09:33:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from boromir.ozlabs.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4K474v3QyJz3cDr for ; Thu, 24 Feb 2022 20:33:35 +1100 (AEDT) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=ibm.com header.i=@ibm.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=pp1 header.b=ahO062tP; dkim-atps=neutral Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=linux.ibm.com (client-ip=148.163.156.1; helo=mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com; envelope-from=borntraeger@linux.ibm.com; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=ibm.com header.i=@ibm.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=pp1 header.b=ahO062tP; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com [148.163.156.1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4K47433rxmz30Mf for ; Thu, 24 Feb 2022 20:32:51 +1100 (AEDT) Received: from pps.filterd (m0098404.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.1.2/8.16.1.2) with SMTP id 21O7wrx2006503; Thu, 24 Feb 2022 09:32:47 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ibm.com; h=message-id : date : mime-version : subject : to : cc : references : from : in-reply-to : content-type : content-transfer-encoding; s=pp1; bh=lEsBqB34OmT9ukB0edFrUutwsZXHJ7NmK0+L1fCvT8s=; b=ahO062tP7CR8SVX/dv2vtCYfiaCLHJMuqepuzp4mNMTglj4w7MbSnHwj/AoLhyLSlau9 QPEZtqxfKP9u9nd/qzsjnfSeUZqzeZJeB9rhNuYfGVBxupYQ+aFxVNiO7/Gei7dJ2D19 3ySAbxdNzvSkfdJPF18YVg81pVznDG/A7U5falme/C1BoXL/FdGZGnOg6sdJsKLBg1qM WkVf46nnJAz7aPpwx/OXm+OWjl0ELB/MNiqKZCqHBJ5M/Ae9w79IKL4JN4VG/zQHtqDj kaRCHMZYnxZHe4r2uEA3a+bwCxvMELC7GWwSq6m8/t2tcy30hAq7WDe1pOreTo0WLe7X Jw== Received: from pps.reinject (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 3edx1wtxf6-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 24 Feb 2022 09:32:46 +0000 Received: from m0098404.ppops.net (m0098404.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by pps.reinject (8.16.0.43/8.16.0.43) with SMTP id 21O9WkDB026665; Thu, 24 Feb 2022 09:32:46 GMT Received: from ppma03ams.nl.ibm.com (62.31.33a9.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [169.51.49.98]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 3edx1wtxea-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 24 Feb 2022 09:32:46 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (ppma03ams.nl.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma03ams.nl.ibm.com (8.16.1.2/8.16.1.2) with SMTP id 21O9Gmp3009190; Thu, 24 Feb 2022 09:32:43 GMT Received: from b06cxnps3075.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06relay10.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.109.195]) by ppma03ams.nl.ibm.com with ESMTP id 3ear69g5kv-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 24 Feb 2022 09:32:43 +0000 Received: from d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.105.58]) by b06cxnps3075.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 21O9WfUa30605784 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 24 Feb 2022 09:32:41 GMT Received: from d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7215C4C04A; Thu, 24 Feb 2022 09:32:41 +0000 (GMT) Received: from d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22DA14C050; Thu, 24 Feb 2022 09:32:41 +0000 (GMT) Received: from [9.171.78.174] (unknown [9.171.78.174]) by d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Thu, 24 Feb 2022 09:32:41 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2022 10:32:40 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.5.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/3] KVM: PPC: Book3S PR: Fixes for AIL and SCV Content-Language: en-US To: Nicholas Piggin , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, Paolo Bonzini References: <20220222064727.2314380-1-npiggin@gmail.com> <6b123068-c982-1fcd-d09e-1a8f465147e3@linux.ibm.com> <1645616541.qspjukz7s5.astroid@bobo.none> From: Christian Borntraeger In-Reply-To: <1645616541.qspjukz7s5.astroid@bobo.none> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: 7h8oK57YXlm5Ju6Xibydpbast8T-XBR9 X-Proofpoint-GUID: Uf4Eza9SUraxl6DSyU6dG_fpfCnjgw-P X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.205,Aquarius:18.0.816,Hydra:6.0.425,FMLib:17.11.64.514 definitions=2022-02-24_01,2022-02-23_01,2022-02-23_01 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 priorityscore=1501 phishscore=0 adultscore=0 mlxscore=0 suspectscore=0 spamscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 impostorscore=0 clxscore=1015 mlxlogscore=877 bulkscore=0 malwarescore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2201110000 definitions=main-2202240056 X-BeenThere: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "Linuxppc-dev" Am 23.02.22 um 12:47 schrieb Nicholas Piggin: > Excerpts from Christian Borntraeger's message of February 23, 2022 7:14 pm: >> >> >> Am 22.02.22 um 15:11 schrieb Paolo Bonzini: >>> On 2/22/22 07:47, Nicholas Piggin wrote: >>>> Patch 3 requires a KVM_CAP_PPC number allocated. QEMU maintainers are >>>> happy with it (link in changelog) just waiting on KVM upstreaming. Do >>>> you have objections to the series going to ppc/kvm tree first, or >>>> another option is you could take patch 3 alone first (it's relatively >>>> independent of the other 2) and ppc/kvm gets it from you? >>> >>> Hi Nick, >>> >>> I have pushed a topic branch kvm-cap-ppc-210 to kvm.git with just the definition and documentation of the capability.  ppc/kvm can apply your patch based on it (and drop the relevant parts of patch 3).  I'll send it to Linus this week. >> >> We to have be careful with the 210 cap that was merged from the s390 tree. > > Ah thanks, I didn't notice it. > > Using 211 is no problem for me, merge will have a conflict now though. > We could avoid it by just sending my patch in a second batch instead of > doing the topic branch this time (I still like the idea of a topic > branch for caps for future). Paolo, the power people have not used your branch yet. So you could - as an alternative also create an kvm-cap-ppc-211 branch for 5.17 and leave the s390 cap at 210. But it would be good to do something now so that we have final numbers for the caps. Either create a kvm-cap-ppc-211 branch, or merge the kvm-cap-ppc-210 branch into next and fixup the s390 cap to become 211.