On Fri, 26 Aug 2022 11:50:24 +0100,
Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>
> On 8/24/22 00:47, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> >> I definitely don't think I 100% understand all the ordering things since
> >> they're complicated.. but my understanding is that the reset procedure
> >> didn't need memory barrier (unlike
On Fri, 26 Aug 2022 11:58:08 +0100,
Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>
> On 8/23/22 22:35, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> >> Heh, yeah I need to get that out the door. I'll also note that Gavin's
> >> changes are still relevant without that series, as we do write unprotect
> >> in parallel at PTE granularity after
On 2021-03-10 11:23, Anshuman Khandual wrote:
> From: James Morse
>
> As per ARM ARM DDI 0487G.a, when FEAT_LPA2 is implemented, ID_AA64MMFR0_EL1
> might contain a range of values to describe supported translation granules
> (4K and 16K pages sizes in particular) instead of just enabled or
On 8/23/22 22:35, Marc Zyngier wrote:
Heh, yeah I need to get that out the door. I'll also note that Gavin's
changes are still relevant without that series, as we do write unprotect
in parallel at PTE granularity after commit f783ef1c0e82 ("KVM: arm64:
Add fast path to handle permission
On 8/24/22 00:47, Marc Zyngier wrote:
I definitely don't think I 100% understand all the ordering things since
they're complicated.. but my understanding is that the reset procedure
didn't need memory barrier (unlike pushing, where we have explicit wmb),
because we assumed the userapp is not
Hi Marc,
On 8/25/22 6:57 AM, Marc Zyngier wrote:
On Wed, 24 Aug 2022 17:21:50 +0100,
Peter Xu wrote:
On Wed, Aug 24, 2022 at 03:45:11PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
On Wed, 24 Aug 2022 00:19:04 +0100,
Peter Xu wrote:
On Tue, Aug 23, 2022 at 11:47:03PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
Atomicity
