Hi Peter,
On 9/14/23 16:57, Peter Maydell wrote:
> The SMMUv3.1-XNX feature is mandatory for an SMMUv3.1 if S2P is
> supported, so we should theoretically have implemented it as part of
> the recent S2P work. Fortunately, for us the implementation is a
> no-op.
>
> This feature is about interpret
Hi Peter,
On Fri, Sep 22, 2023 at 11:54:06AM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On Fri, 22 Sept 2023 at 11:34, Mostafa Saleh wrote:
> >
> > Hi Peter,
> >
> > On Thu, Sep 14, 2023 at 03:57:05PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
> > > The SMMUv3.1-XNX feature is mandatory for an SMMUv3.1 if S2P is
> > > suppo
On Fri, 22 Sept 2023 at 11:34, Mostafa Saleh wrote:
>
> Hi Peter,
>
> On Thu, Sep 14, 2023 at 03:57:05PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
> > The SMMUv3.1-XNX feature is mandatory for an SMMUv3.1 if S2P is
> > supported, so we should theoretically have implemented it as part of
> > the recent S2P work.
Hi Peter,
On Thu, Sep 14, 2023 at 03:57:05PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
> The SMMUv3.1-XNX feature is mandatory for an SMMUv3.1 if S2P is
> supported, so we should theoretically have implemented it as part of
> the recent S2P work. Fortunately, for us the implementation is a
> no-op.
>
> This f
The SMMUv3.1-XNX feature is mandatory for an SMMUv3.1 if S2P is
supported, so we should theoretically have implemented it as part of
the recent S2P work. Fortunately, for us the implementation is a
no-op.
This feature is about interpretation of the stage 2 page table
descriptor XN bits, which con
