[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <aEyPswyvfJ2-oC3l@linux.dev>
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2025 13:53:07 -0700
From: Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@...ux.dev>
To: Raghavendra Rao Ananta <rananta@...gle.com>
Cc: Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>, Mingwei Zhang <mizhang@...gle.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, kvmarm@...ts.linux.dev,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/4] KVM: arm64: Add attribute to control
GICD_TYPER2.nASSGIcap
On Fri, Jun 13, 2025 at 03:52:34PM +0000, Raghavendra Rao Ananta wrote:
> A shortcoming of the GIC architecture is that there's an absolute limit on
> the number of vPEs that can be tracked by the ITS. It is possible that
> an operator is running a mix of VMs on a system, only wanting to provide
> a specific class of VMs with hardware interrupt injection support.
>
> The series introduces KVM_DEV_ARM_VGIC_FEATURE_nASSGIcap vGIC attribute to allow
> the userspace to control GICD_TYPER2.nASSGIcap (GICv4.1) on a per-VM basis.
>
> v1: https://lore.kernel.org/kvmarm/20250514192159.1751538-1-rananta@google.com/
>
> v1 -> v2: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250531012545.709887-1-oliver.upton@linux.dev/
> - Drop all use of GICv4 in the UAPI and KVM-internal helpers in favor
> of nASSGIcap. This changes things around to model a guest feature,
> not a host feature.
>
> - Consolidate UAPI into a single attribute and expect userspace to use
> to read the attribute for discovery, much like we do with the ID
> registers
>
> - Squash documentation together with implementation
>
> - Clean up maintenance IRQ attribute handling, which I ran into as part
> of reviewing this series
>
> v2 -> v3:
> - Update checks in vgic-v3.c and vgic-v4.c to also include nASSGIcap (via
> vgic_supports_direct_sgis()) that's configured by the userspace. (Oliver)
>
> Oliver Upton (2):
> KVM: arm64: Disambiguate support for vSGIs v. vLPIs
> KVM: arm64: vgic-v3: Consolidate MAINT_IRQ handling
Make sure you run checkpatch next time before sending out, it should've
warned you about sending patches w/o including your SOB.
Thanks,
Oliver
Powered by blists - more mailing lists