From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
To: Steven Price <steven.price@arm.com>
Cc: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>, Keqian Zhu <zhukeqian1@huawei.com>,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/5] KVM: arm64: Add pvtime LPT support
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2020 13:52:30 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200825125230.GA33677@C02TD0UTHF1T.local> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <f14cfd5b-c103-5d56-82fb-59d0371c6f21@arm.com>
On Wed, Aug 19, 2020 at 09:54:40AM +0100, Steven Price wrote:
> On 18/08/2020 15:41, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> > On 2020-08-17 09:41, Keqian Zhu wrote:
> We are discussing (re-)releasing the spec with the LPT parts added. If you
> have fundamental objections then please me know.
Like Marc, I argued strongly for the removal of the LPT bits on the
premise that it didn't really work (e.g. when transistioning between SW
agents) and so it was a pure maintenance burden.
I don't think the technical arguments have changed, and I don't think
it's a good idea to try to ressurect this. Please rope me in if
this comes up in internal discussions.
Mark.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
To: Steven Price <steven.price@arm.com>
Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/5] KVM: arm64: Add pvtime LPT support
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2020 13:52:30 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200825125230.GA33677@C02TD0UTHF1T.local> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <f14cfd5b-c103-5d56-82fb-59d0371c6f21@arm.com>
On Wed, Aug 19, 2020 at 09:54:40AM +0100, Steven Price wrote:
> On 18/08/2020 15:41, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> > On 2020-08-17 09:41, Keqian Zhu wrote:
> We are discussing (re-)releasing the spec with the LPT parts added. If you
> have fundamental objections then please me know.
Like Marc, I argued strongly for the removal of the LPT bits on the
premise that it didn't really work (e.g. when transistioning between SW
agents) and so it was a pure maintenance burden.
I don't think the technical arguments have changed, and I don't think
it's a good idea to try to ressurect this. Please rope me in if
this comes up in internal discussions.
Mark.
_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
To: Steven Price <steven.price@arm.com>
Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>,
Keqian Zhu <zhukeqian1@huawei.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/5] KVM: arm64: Add pvtime LPT support
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2020 13:52:30 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200825125230.GA33677@C02TD0UTHF1T.local> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <f14cfd5b-c103-5d56-82fb-59d0371c6f21@arm.com>
On Wed, Aug 19, 2020 at 09:54:40AM +0100, Steven Price wrote:
> On 18/08/2020 15:41, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> > On 2020-08-17 09:41, Keqian Zhu wrote:
> We are discussing (re-)releasing the spec with the LPT parts added. If you
> have fundamental objections then please me know.
Like Marc, I argued strongly for the removal of the LPT bits on the
premise that it didn't really work (e.g. when transistioning between SW
agents) and so it was a pure maintenance burden.
I don't think the technical arguments have changed, and I don't think
it's a good idea to try to ressurect this. Please rope me in if
this comes up in internal discussions.
Mark.
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-08-25 12:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 40+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-08-17 8:41 [RFC PATCH 0/5] KVM: arm64: Add pvtime LPT support Keqian Zhu
2020-08-17 8:41 ` Keqian Zhu
2020-08-17 8:41 ` Keqian Zhu
2020-08-17 8:41 ` [RFC PATCH 1/5] KVM: arm64: Document pvtime LPT interface Keqian Zhu
2020-08-17 8:41 ` Keqian Zhu
2020-08-17 8:41 ` Keqian Zhu
2020-08-17 8:41 ` [RFC PATCH 2/5] KVM: arm64: Support Live Physical Time reporting Keqian Zhu
2020-08-17 8:41 ` Keqian Zhu
2020-08-17 8:41 ` Keqian Zhu
2020-08-17 8:41 ` [RFC PATCH 3/5] KVM: arm64: Provide VM device attributes for LPT time Keqian Zhu
2020-08-17 8:41 ` Keqian Zhu
2020-08-17 8:41 ` Keqian Zhu
2020-08-17 8:41 ` [RFC PATCH 4/5] clocksource: arm_arch_timer: Add pvtime LPT initialization Keqian Zhu
2020-08-17 8:41 ` Keqian Zhu
2020-08-17 8:41 ` Keqian Zhu
2020-08-17 8:41 ` [RFC PATCH 5/5] clocksource: arm_arch_timer: Use pvtime LPT Keqian Zhu
2020-08-17 8:41 ` Keqian Zhu
2020-08-17 8:41 ` Keqian Zhu
2020-08-17 10:43 ` kernel test robot
2020-08-18 14:41 ` [RFC PATCH 0/5] KVM: arm64: Add pvtime LPT support Marc Zyngier
2020-08-18 14:41 ` Marc Zyngier
2020-08-18 14:41 ` Marc Zyngier
2020-08-19 8:54 ` Steven Price
2020-08-19 8:54 ` Steven Price
2020-08-19 8:54 ` Steven Price
2020-08-21 3:54 ` zhukeqian
2020-08-21 3:54 ` zhukeqian
2020-08-21 3:54 ` zhukeqian
2020-08-22 10:31 ` Marc Zyngier
2020-08-22 10:31 ` Marc Zyngier
2020-08-22 10:31 ` Marc Zyngier
2020-09-02 10:09 ` Steven Price
2020-09-02 10:09 ` Steven Price
2020-09-02 10:09 ` Steven Price
2020-09-07 2:48 ` zhukeqian
2020-09-07 2:48 ` zhukeqian
2020-09-07 2:48 ` zhukeqian
2020-08-25 12:52 ` Mark Rutland [this message]
2020-08-25 12:52 ` Mark Rutland
2020-08-25 12:52 ` Mark Rutland
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20200825125230.GA33677@C02TD0UTHF1T.local \
--to=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=steven.price@arm.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
--cc=zhukeqian1@huawei.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.