On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 11:51:00AM +, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Jan 2025 11:34:09 +, Mark Rutland wrote:
> > The TL;DR summary is that it's not sufficient for kvm_arch_vcpu_put_fp()
> > to fix up ZCR_ELx. Either:
> >
> > * That needs to be fixed up while IRQs are masked, e.g. by
>
On Fri, 17 Jan 2025 11:34:09 +,
Mark Rutland wrote:
>
> On Fri, Dec 20, 2024 at 04:46:34PM +, Mark Brown wrote:
> > The SVE portion of kvm_vcpu_put() is quite large, especially given the
> > comments required. When we add similar handling for SME the function
> > will get even larger, in
On Fri, Jan 17, 2025 at 11:34:09AM +, Mark Rutland wrote:
> I think we need to fix that before we extend this logic for SME.
Based on some off list discussion I gather you're working on some fixes
including this?
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
On Fri, Dec 20, 2024 at 04:46:34PM +, Mark Brown wrote:
> The SVE portion of kvm_vcpu_put() is quite large, especially given the
> comments required. When we add similar handling for SME the function
> will get even larger, in order to keep things managable factor the SVE
> portion out of the
The SVE portion of kvm_vcpu_put() is quite large, especially given the
comments required. When we add similar handling for SME the function
will get even larger, in order to keep things managable factor the SVE
portion out of the main kvm_vcpu_put().
Signed-off-by: Mark Brown
---
arch/arm64/kvm
