Hi Marc,
On Fri, Jul 30, 2021 at 9:48 AM Oliver Upton wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jul 30, 2021 at 9:18 AM Marc Zyngier wrote:
> > You want the ARM FVP model, or maybe even the Foundation model. It has
> > support all the way to ARMv8.7 apparently. I personally use the FVP,
> > get in touch offline and
On Fri, Jul 30, 2021 at 9:18 AM Marc Zyngier wrote:
> You want the ARM FVP model, or maybe even the Foundation model. It has
> support all the way to ARMv8.7 apparently. I personally use the FVP,
> get in touch offline and I'll help you with the setup.
>
> In general, I tend to trust the ARM
On Fri, Jul 30, 2021 at 4:08 AM Marc Zyngier wrote:
> > FEAT_ECV provides a guest physical counter-timer offset register
> > (CNTPOFF_EL2), but ECV-enabled hardware is nonexistent at the time of
> > writing so support for it was elided for the sake of the author :)
>
> You seem to have done most
On Fri, 30 Jul 2021 16:22:01 +0100,
Oliver Upton wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jul 30, 2021 at 4:08 AM Marc Zyngier wrote:
> > > FEAT_ECV provides a guest physical counter-timer offset register
> > > (CNTPOFF_EL2), but ECV-enabled hardware is nonexistent at the time of
> > > writing so support for it was
On Thu, 29 Jul 2021 18:32:58 +0100,
Oliver Upton wrote:
>
> Presently, KVM provides no facilities for correctly migrating a guest
> that depends on the physical counter-timer. While most guests (barring
> NV, of course) should not depend on the physical counter-timer, an
> operator may still
Presently, KVM provides no facilities for correctly migrating a guest
that depends on the physical counter-timer. While most guests (barring
NV, of course) should not depend on the physical counter-timer, an
operator may still wish to provide a consistent view of the physical
counter-timer across
