On 07/25/2014 11:02 AM, Peter Maydell wrote: > On 25 July 2014 16:56, Joel Schopp <joel.schopp@xxxxxxx> wrote: >> The problem with this patch is the gicv is really 8K. The reason you >> would map at a 60K offset (0xf000), and why we do on our SOC, is so that >> the 8K gicv would pick up the last 4K from the first page and the first >> 4K from the next page. With your patch it is impossible to map all 8K >> of the gicv with 64K pages. >> >> My SOC which works fine with kvm now will go to not working with kvm >> after this patch. > Your SOC currently works by fluke because the guest doesn't > look at the last 4K of the GICC. If you're happy with it continuing > to work by fluke you could make your device tree say it had a > 64K GICV region with a 64K-aligned base. > > To make it work not by fluke but actually correctly requires > Marc's patchset, at a minimum. Since we aren't actually using the last 4K of the gicv at the moment I supppose I could drop my objections to this patch and change my device tree until Marc's patchset provides a proper solution for the gicv's second 4K that works for everybody. Acked-by: Joel Schopp <joel.schopp@xxxxxxx> _______________________________________________ kvmarm mailing list kvmarm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
