From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christoffer Dall Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/5] arm/arm64: Making HYP vgic/timer save/restore common Date: Tue, 9 Feb 2016 21:38:03 +0100 Message-ID: <20160209203803.GD5171@cbox> References: <1453996565-19666-1-git-send-email-marc.zyngier@arm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Paolo Bonzini , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu To: Marc Zyngier Return-path: Received: from mail-wm0-f43.google.com ([74.125.82.43]:37551 "EHLO mail-wm0-f43.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754134AbcBIUh0 (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 Feb 2016 15:37:26 -0500 Received: by mail-wm0-f43.google.com with SMTP id g62so181872wme.0 for ; Tue, 09 Feb 2016 12:37:26 -0800 (PST) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1453996565-19666-1-git-send-email-marc.zyngier@arm.com> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 03:56:00PM +0000, Marc Zyngier wrote: > With the current state of the C conversion of arm and arm64 world > switches, we are still unable to share some of the most obvious > candidates (GIC and timer save/restore). In order to reduce the bloat, > let's move these files to a common location (virt/kvm/arm/hyp). > > The changes are extremely mechanical, with a small hack to deal with > system register names on the 32bit side (I've decided to align on the > 64bit names). > > I'd like to know what people think of the common location. Does it > makes sense to have a "hyp" subdirectory to indicate that this is not > "normal" kernel code? > > These patches are on top of 4.5-rc1, plus the VHE and 32bit WS rewrite > patches, and I've pushed out a branch at > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/maz/arm-platforms.git kvm-arm64/mov-hyp > ack on this series, tested on TC2 and Mustang as well. -Christoffer From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: christoffer.dall@linaro.org (Christoffer Dall) Date: Tue, 9 Feb 2016 21:38:03 +0100 Subject: [RFC PATCH 0/5] arm/arm64: Making HYP vgic/timer save/restore common In-Reply-To: <1453996565-19666-1-git-send-email-marc.zyngier@arm.com> References: <1453996565-19666-1-git-send-email-marc.zyngier@arm.com> Message-ID: <20160209203803.GD5171@cbox> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 03:56:00PM +0000, Marc Zyngier wrote: > With the current state of the C conversion of arm and arm64 world > switches, we are still unable to share some of the most obvious > candidates (GIC and timer save/restore). In order to reduce the bloat, > let's move these files to a common location (virt/kvm/arm/hyp). > > The changes are extremely mechanical, with a small hack to deal with > system register names on the 32bit side (I've decided to align on the > 64bit names). > > I'd like to know what people think of the common location. Does it > makes sense to have a "hyp" subdirectory to indicate that this is not > "normal" kernel code? > > These patches are on top of 4.5-rc1, plus the VHE and 32bit WS rewrite > patches, and I've pushed out a branch at > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/maz/arm-platforms.git kvm-arm64/mov-hyp > ack on this series, tested on TC2 and Mustang as well. -Christoffer