From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6AB43C3B187 for ; Tue, 11 Feb 2020 15:23:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mm01.cs.columbia.edu (mm01.cs.columbia.edu [128.59.11.253]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFA83206DB for ; Tue, 11 Feb 2020 15:23:54 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org EFA83206DB Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=kvmarm-bounces@lists.cs.columbia.edu Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mm01.cs.columbia.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 87A644AE95; Tue, 11 Feb 2020 10:23:54 -0500 (EST) X-Virus-Scanned: at lists.cs.columbia.edu Received: from mm01.cs.columbia.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mm01.cs.columbia.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id XPG0PTElh0V5; Tue, 11 Feb 2020 10:23:53 -0500 (EST) Received: from mm01.cs.columbia.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mm01.cs.columbia.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60B824A5BD; Tue, 11 Feb 2020 10:23:53 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mm01.cs.columbia.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2766D4A59B for ; Tue, 11 Feb 2020 10:23:52 -0500 (EST) X-Virus-Scanned: at lists.cs.columbia.edu Received: from mm01.cs.columbia.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mm01.cs.columbia.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id UkKU8UF40oo9 for ; Tue, 11 Feb 2020 10:23:51 -0500 (EST) Received: from foss.arm.com (foss.arm.com [217.140.110.172]) by mm01.cs.columbia.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id EBDC74A54B for ; Tue, 11 Feb 2020 10:23:50 -0500 (EST) Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 78ACE30E; Tue, 11 Feb 2020 07:23:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from arrakis.emea.arm.com (arrakis.cambridge.arm.com [10.1.196.71]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 81C283F68E; Tue, 11 Feb 2020 07:23:48 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2020 15:23:46 +0000 From: Catalin Marinas To: Marc Zyngier Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/5] Removing support for 32bit KVM/arm host Message-ID: <20200211152346.GD153117@arrakis.emea.arm.com> References: <20200210141324.21090-1-maz@kernel.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200210141324.21090-1-maz@kernel.org> Cc: Anders Berg , Russell King , Arnd Bergmann , kvm@vger.kernel.org, Paolo Bonzini , Will Deacon , kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-BeenThere: kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Where KVM/ARM decisions are made List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: kvmarm-bounces@lists.cs.columbia.edu Sender: kvmarm-bounces@lists.cs.columbia.edu On Mon, Feb 10, 2020 at 02:13:19PM +0000, Marc Zyngier wrote: > KVM/arm was merged just over 7 years ago, and has lived a very quiet > life so far. It mostly works if you're prepared to deal with its > limitations, it has been a good prototype for the arm64 version, > but it suffers a few problems: > > - It is incomplete (no debug support, no PMU) > - It hasn't followed any of the architectural evolutions > - It has zero users (I don't count myself here) > - It is more and more getting in the way of new arm64 developments > > So here it is: unless someone screams and shows that they rely on > KVM/arm to be maintained upsteam, I'll remove 32bit host support > form the tree. One of the reasons that makes me confident nobody is > using it is that I never receive *any* bug report. Yes, it is perfect. > But if you depend on KVM/arm being available in mainline, please shout. > > To reiterate: 32bit guest support for arm64 stays, of course. Only > 32bit host goes. Once this is merged, I plan to move virt/kvm/arm to > arm64, and cleanup all the now unnecessary abstractions. > > The patches have been generated with the -D option to avoid spamming > everyone with huge diffs, and there is a kvm-arm/goodbye branch in > my kernel.org repository. > > Marc Zyngier (5): > arm: Unplug KVM from the build system > arm: Remove KVM from config files > arm: Remove 32bit KVM host support > arm: Remove HYP/Stage-2 page-table support > arm: Remove GICv3 vgic compatibility macros FWIW: Acked-by: Catalin Marinas _______________________________________________ kvmarm mailing list kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm