On 17 September 2016 at 16:38, Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 17 September 2016 at 16:28, Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Another thing to keep in mind is that GICv2 >> compatibility is disabled on the non-secure side if the secure side >> elects to configure its view of the GIC as v3 (i.e., in order to >> support >8 cores) > > If I'm reading the 'legacy configurations' chapter of the GICv3 > spec correctly, that is true for the NS host OS (ie the one > handling physical interrupts) but a guest OS can still use > the old GICv2-compat interface (assuming it was implemented > in silicon at all). > Ah right, apologies for spreading misinformation. But my first point is still valid. _______________________________________________ kvmarm mailing list kvmarm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
