Hi Alex, On Thu, Oct 01, 2020 at 11:21:43AM +0100, Alexandru Elisei wrote: > On 9/11/20 2:25 PM, Will Deacon wrote: > > It's me again, with version five of the KVM page-table rework previously > > seen at: > > > > v1: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200730153406.25136-1-will@xxxxxxxxxx > > v2: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200818132818.16065-1-will@xxxxxxxxxx > > v3: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200825093953.26493-1-will@xxxxxxxxxx > > v4: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200907152344.12978-1-will@xxxxxxxxxx > > > > Changes since v4 include: > > > > * Add comments to the kerneldoc describing alignment behaviour for > > addresses and size parameters > > * Fix formatting of IPA size messages > > * Fix handling of unaligned addresses in kvm_phys_addr_ioremap() > > * Add DSB after zeroing stage-2 PGD pages > > * Add reviewer tags > > > > Once again, thanks to Alex, Gavin and Andrew for their comments. > > I didn't realize that there won't be another iteration of the series. I reviewed > all the patches with the exception of patch #5 ("KVM: arm64: Use generic allocator > for hyp stage-1 page-tables") because I don't know much about what needs to mapped > at EL2 stage 1, everything else looks alright to me. If the commit message can be > modified, you can add my Reviewed-by tag to the series (sans #5); it's fine if > that's not possible. The patches ended up in kvmarm/next as the remaining comments were pretty minor, so I've just been sending patches on top to clear up the leftovers (e.g. passing the TLBI level when handling a stage-2 permission fault). Cheers for your review, the series definitely ended up in a much better shape for it. The hyp code is a walk in the park compared with the stage-2 parts, so don't worry about skipping that. Will _______________________________________________ kvmarm mailing list kvmarm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
