On Sat, 21 Feb 2026 at 07:14, Michael Tokarev <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 02.02.2026 16:33, Peter Maydell wrote: > > In aarch64_sve_narrow_vq() we assert that the new VQ is within > > the maximum supported range for the CPU. We forgot to update > > this to account for SME, which might have a different maximum. > > > > Update the assert to permit any VQ which is valid for either > > SVE or SME. > > > > Cc: [email protected] > > Signed-off-by: Peter Maydell <[email protected]> > > Reviewed-by: Alex Bennée <[email protected]> > > Reviewed-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <[email protected]> > > Reviewed-by: Richard Henderson <[email protected]> > > --- > > CC stable on this one, because it might also be a problem for > > a CPU with both SME and SVE but where the SVE max VL is less > > than the SME max VL. > > Hi! > > I suppose this one makes sense for 10.0.x (LTS) series too. There, > I had to cherry-pick another change for this one to work, - > v10.0.0-1910-gc48d0471be "target/arm: Introduce ARMCPU.sme_max_vq" - > it appears to be harmless for 10.0.x and makes this fix to work there. > > Please let me know if I should've resolved this in some different > way, for example not picking up this change for 10.0.x :) > > The result are the topmost 2 commits at > https://gitlab.com/mjt0k/qemu/-/commits/05271d6e00894ef47267133dedd6a69c2a3147a5
Yes, I think that's OK and it's reasonable to do this backport. The combined 2 changes are at least safe, because the MAX() means we're relaxing the assertion so it fires less often. -- PMM
