[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <86zfrpjkt6.wl-maz@kernel.org>
Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2024 09:42:13 +0100
From: Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>
To: Shaoqin Huang <shahuang@...hat.com>
Cc: Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@...ux.dev>,
kvmarm@...ts.linux.dev,
Eric Auger <eauger@...hat.com>,
Sebastian Ott <sebott@...hat.com>,
Cornelia Huck <cohuck@...hat.com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
James Morse
<james.morse@....com>,
kvm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@....com>,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
Zenghui Yu <yuzenghui@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v1 0/2] KVM: arm64: Making BT Field in ID_AA64PFR1_EL1 writable
On Thu, 13 Jun 2024 09:31:45 +0100,
Shaoqin Huang <shahuang@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> If we don't care about the FEAT_CNTSC right now. Could I fix the
> compile issue and respin this again without the background of enabling
> migration between MtCollins and AmpereOne, and just keep the
> information of the different BT field between different machine?
As I said, I think this patch is valuable. But maybe you should
consider tackling the full register, rather than only addressing a
single field.
Thanks,
M.
--
Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists