[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <aB35aOZzdKZKMOht@arm.com>
Date: Fri, 9 May 2025 13:47:36 +0100
From: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
To: Ankit Agrawal <ankita@...dia.com>
Cc: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>, Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@...ux.dev>,
Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>,
Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>,
"joey.gouly@....com" <joey.gouly@....com>,
"suzuki.poulose@....com" <suzuki.poulose@....com>,
"yuzenghui@...wei.com" <yuzenghui@...wei.com>,
"will@...nel.org" <will@...nel.org>,
"ryan.roberts@....com" <ryan.roberts@....com>,
"shahuang@...hat.com" <shahuang@...hat.com>,
"lpieralisi@...nel.org" <lpieralisi@...nel.org>,
"david@...hat.com" <david@...hat.com>,
Aniket Agashe <aniketa@...dia.com>, Neo Jia <cjia@...dia.com>,
Kirti Wankhede <kwankhede@...dia.com>,
"Tarun Gupta (SW-GPU)" <targupta@...dia.com>,
Vikram Sethi <vsethi@...dia.com>, Andy Currid <acurrid@...dia.com>,
Alistair Popple <apopple@...dia.com>,
John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com>, Dan Williams <danw@...dia.com>,
Zhi Wang <zhiw@...dia.com>, Matt Ochs <mochs@...dia.com>,
Uday Dhoke <udhoke@...dia.com>, Dheeraj Nigam <dnigam@...dia.com>,
Krishnakant Jaju <kjaju@...dia.com>,
"alex.williamson@...hat.com" <alex.williamson@...hat.com>,
"sebastianene@...gle.com" <sebastianene@...gle.com>,
"coltonlewis@...gle.com" <coltonlewis@...gle.com>,
"kevin.tian@...el.com" <kevin.tian@...el.com>,
"yi.l.liu@...el.com" <yi.l.liu@...el.com>,
"ardb@...nel.org" <ardb@...nel.org>,
"akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"gshan@...hat.com" <gshan@...hat.com>,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
"ddutile@...hat.com" <ddutile@...hat.com>,
"tabba@...gle.com" <tabba@...gle.com>,
"qperret@...gle.com" <qperret@...gle.com>,
"kvmarm@...ts.linux.dev" <kvmarm@...ts.linux.dev>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/1] KVM: arm64: Allow cacheable stage 2 mapping using
VMA flags
On Wed, May 07, 2025 at 03:26:05PM +0000, Ankit Agrawal wrote:
> >> Unless FWB implies CTR_EL0.DIC (AFAIK, it doesn't) we may be
> >> restricting some CPUs.
> >
> > Yes, it will further narrow the CPUs down.
> >
> > However, we just did this discussion for BBML2 + SMMUv3 SVA. I think
> > the same argument holds. If someone is crazy enough to build a CPU
> > with CXLish support and uses an old core without DIC, IDC and S2FWB
> > then they are going to have a bunch of work to fix the SW to support
> > it. Right now we know of no system that exists like this..
> >
> > Jason
>
> Catalin, do you agree if I can go ahead and add the check for
> ARM64_HAS_CACHE_DIC?
As long as we don't leave out some hardware that has FWB but not DIC,
that's fine by me.
--
Catalin
Powered by blists - more mailing lists