On Mon, Feb 05, 2018 at 10:42:44AM +0000, Marc Zyngier wrote: > On 05/02/18 09:58, Andrew Jones wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 05, 2018 at 09:24:33AM +0000, Marc Zyngier wrote: > >> On 04/02/18 12:37, Christoffer Dall wrote: > > [...] > > >>> Given the urgency of adding mitigation towards variant 2 which is the > >>> driver for this work, I think we should drop the compat functionality in > >>> this series and work this out later on if needed. I think we can just > >>> tweak the previous patch to enable PSCI 1.0 by default and drop this > >>> patch for the current merge window. > >> > >> I'd be fine with that, as long as we have a clear agreement on the > >> impact of such a move. > > > > Yeah, that's what I was trying to figure out with my fancy tables. I might > > be coming around more to your approach now, though. Ensuring the new->old > > migration fails is a nice feature of this series. It would be good if > > we could preserve that behavior without committing to a new userspace > > interface, but I'm not sure how. Maybe I should just apologize for the > > noise, and this patch be left as is... > > How about we don't decide now? > > I can remove this patch from the series so that the core stuff can make > it into the arm64 tree ASAP (I think Catalin wants to queue something > early this week so that it can hit Linus' tree before the end of the > merge window), and then repost this single patch on its own (with fixes > for the things that Christoffer found in his review) after -rc1. > > It leaves us time to haggle over the userspace ABI (which is > realistically not going to affect anyone), and we get the core stuff in > place for SoC vendors to start updating their firmware. > I agree, that's what I tried to suggest in my e-mail as well. Just remember to tweak the previous patch to actually enable PSCI 1.0 by default. Thanks, -Christoffer _______________________________________________ kvmarm mailing list kvmarm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
