On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 05:24:18PM +0100, Joel Schopp wrote: > > 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> Thanks, Joel. Will _______________________________________________ kvmarm mailing list kvmarm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
