On Sat, 27 May 2023 05:02:32 +0100, Reiji Watanabe <reijiw@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > This series fixes issues with PMUVer handling for a guest with > PMU configured on heterogeneous PMU systems. > Specifically, it addresses the following two issues. > > [A] The default value of ID_AA64DFR0_EL1.PMUVer of the vCPU is set > to its sanitized value. This could be inappropriate on > heterogeneous PMU systems, as arm64_ftr_bits for PMUVer is defined > as FTR_EXACT with safe_val == 0 (when ID_AA64DFR0_EL1.PMUVer of all > PEs on the host is not uniform, the sanitized value will be 0). Why is this a problem? The CPUs don't implement the same version of the architecture, we don't get a PMU. Why should we try to do anything better? I really don't think we should go out or out way and make the code more complicated for something that doesn't really exist. Or am I missing the problem altogether? Thanks, M. -- Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.
