From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753197AbbIBJzN (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Sep 2015 05:55:13 -0400 Received: from mail-io0-f173.google.com ([209.85.223.173]:34970 "EHLO mail-io0-f173.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752023AbbIBJzL (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Sep 2015 05:55:11 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1439465645-22584-1-git-send-email-suzuki.poulose@arm.com> References: <1439465645-22584-1-git-send-email-suzuki.poulose@arm.com> Date: Wed, 2 Sep 2015 11:55:10 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/14] arm64: 16K translation granule support From: Ard Biesheuvel To: "Suzuki K. Poulose" Cc: "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , Mark Rutland , KVM devel mailing list , Marc Zyngier , Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 13 August 2015 at 13:33, Suzuki K. Poulose wrote: > From: "Suzuki K. Poulose" > > This series enables the 16K page size support on Linux for arm64. > This series adds support for 48bit VA(4 level), 47bit VA(3 level) and > 36bit VA(2 level) with 16K. 16K was a late addition to the architecture > and is not implemented by all CPUs. Added a check to ensure the > selected granule size is supported by the CPU, failing which the CPU > won't proceed with booting. > > KVM bits have been tested on a fast model with GICv3 using Andre's kvmtool > with gicv3 support[1]. > > Patches 1-7 cleans up the kernel page size handling code. > Patches 8-11 Fixes some issues with the KVM bits, mainly the fake PGD > handling code. > Patch 12 Adds a check to ensure the CPU supports the selected granule size. > Patch 13-14 Adds the 16k page size support bits. > > This series applies on top of for-next/core branch of the aarch64 tree and is > also available here: > > git://linux-arm.org/linux-skp.git 16k/v1 > Hi Suzuki, I have given this a spin on the FVP Base model to check UEFI booting, and everything seems to work fine. (I tested 2-level and 3-level) I didn't test the KVM changes, so for all patches except those: Reviewed-by: Ard Biesheuvel Tested-by: Ard Biesheuvel Regards, Ard.