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.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (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 E1047C433F5 for ; Thu, 28 Apr 2022 10:44:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1]:52158 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nk1d5-00034b-Rd for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Thu, 28 Apr 2022 06:44:11 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:43718) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nk136-0006Wm-J6 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 28 Apr 2022 06:07:04 -0400 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([170.10.133.124]:56243) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nk134-0002wa-Fc for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 28 Apr 2022 06:06:59 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1651140417; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=xvXIVYARS0M13aQYDE1m0N2qxs6WtMYDg6I4o7+4u8Q=; b=b1VsJtG1ZNYdBaJqILi/eHp/nYv9bkognBOoSmukeIMnzH7A1I3BkM7PNzkIrPkfnm2gfR 3g/kKhiQ8W7hKwOhAjgCko2Vw3D4xflxylxXJwpMSnTp584mxGt5i+NI8G/LOVZsSOR0G/ V6uODcJGOI4GsNNlorCFyxjfHL70ASo= Received: from mail-qv1-f71.google.com (mail-qv1-f71.google.com [209.85.219.71]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-460-JqJHBI_POOGS9edglYGPJQ-1; Thu, 28 Apr 2022 06:06:55 -0400 X-MC-Unique: JqJHBI_POOGS9edglYGPJQ-1 Received: by mail-qv1-f71.google.com with SMTP id jx10-20020a0562142b0a00b00456531ba83dso2821321qvb.16 for ; Thu, 28 Apr 2022 03:06:55 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:mime-version:user-agent:reply-to :subject:content-language:to:cc:references:from:in-reply-to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=xvXIVYARS0M13aQYDE1m0N2qxs6WtMYDg6I4o7+4u8Q=; b=JtWm3cGUQr1UhERJk0juWeTRouzJpuAQ+x+u5kFl1KRaHF4AILHIwV8Ol1Pte60FoS //AgAGsZ2GS1pZxr5brcquVUb5DjeA+ELQGWoV7e4ukjLcZE06icC+5krNAqYTevrAz7 bB3VC9xGPfk+cCfVptnKf5xRfqXyQY8iC4t1EhQyxftQp8+z6gNy7mhuAMpn+fGB8Sa5 gg/ucZBA4tdWX3gMSA4HjgS4vSuECFMFUbDjTcfjLY09PnrN+wqr0WcOrAj36Hb/IZ4y liHnN9xr85K0PZc0qapGNEhghmN2SKx3PXAdCQv3ODbY9STBsyg8XCglRKQmqqGkf9K4 VjNA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530mClSuD1OvGbVpFT7pmCQwMjbK/WQ7w8snaa2QZzR/Vkvf1bwO ESZOCYV728roIJo75BJYMJx1kL8/sSM7m//3pVazn4JQlpKqbiPW6/ct+9vTDebpfeLEC9M6sGH 8JKEjuddbio6zwZ4= X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:4306:b0:67b:32f1:99c4 with SMTP id u6-20020a05620a430600b0067b32f199c4mr18539666qko.776.1651140415529; Thu, 28 Apr 2022 03:06:55 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJx+HnNw12vC5cG7MzvfgQwOjGRAnJJFayGKUVr+7WxhCRP/+mt4CwQSmE9p1kvJ4Pm9SywF2Q== X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:4306:b0:67b:32f1:99c4 with SMTP id u6-20020a05620a430600b0067b32f199c4mr18539650qko.776.1651140415284; Thu, 28 Apr 2022 03:06:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?IPV6:2a01:e0a:59e:9d80:527b:9dff:feef:3874? ([2a01:e0a:59e:9d80:527b:9dff:feef:3874]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id x13-20020a05620a258d00b0069c7468e123sm9742518qko.122.2022.04.28.03.06.53 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 28 Apr 2022 03:06:54 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <5c5cb1c4-471a-99c3-6da1-a1b92eebcea8@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2022 12:06:52 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.7.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] hw/arm/smmuv3: Advertise support for SMMUv3.2-BBML2 Content-Language: en-US To: Peter Maydell References: <20220426160422.2353158-1-peter.maydell@linaro.org> <20220426160422.2353158-4-peter.maydell@linaro.org> <4cd9121f-6c9f-f461-836f-a4b1ba8fedcd@redhat.com> From: Eric Auger In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Received-SPF: pass client-ip=170.10.133.124; envelope-from=eric.auger@redhat.com; helo=us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com X-Spam_score_int: -28 X-Spam_score: -2.9 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.9 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.082, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01 autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: eric.auger@redhat.com Cc: qemu-arm@nongnu.org, Richard Henderson , qemu-devel@nongnu.org Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" On 4/28/22 11:26, Peter Maydell wrote: > On Thu, 28 Apr 2022 at 09:37, Eric Auger wrote: >> On 4/26/22 18:04, Peter Maydell wrote: >>> TLB invalidation correctly removes all TLB entries matching >>> the specified address or address range (unless the guest specifies the >>> leaf level explicitly, in which case it gets what it asked for). So we >> " >> >> unless the guest specifies the >> leaf level explicitly, in which case it gets what it asked for >> >> " >> This is the less obvious part as the spec says: >> >> "A TLB invalidation operation removes all matching TLB entries even if >> overlapping entries exist for a given >> address." >> >> I failed to find further precisions about the range invalidation & BBML. > If the invalidate says "level 2" then a TLB entry that wasn't > put in at level 2 doesn't match the TLB invalidate request and so > isn't removed (whether it overlaps a matching one at the same > address or not). This is defined as part of the behaviour of TLB > invalidates which specify a TTL, eg on page 142. > > An implementation which did something like "find the first entry > that matches the address, then notice that it doesn't match > the specified TTL, so ignore it and do nothing" wouldn't be > correct. But "invalidate all the entries which match for > both address and TTL and ignore the ones which don't match > on TTL" is fine. OK Thanks Eric > >> If you are confident about this, it looks good to me. >> Reviewed-by: Eric Auger > Thanks. > > -- PMM >