qemu-arm
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-arm] [PATCH v3 00/15] target/arm/kvm: enable SVE in guests


From: Peter Maydell
Subject: Re: [Qemu-arm] [PATCH v3 00/15] target/arm/kvm: enable SVE in guests
Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2019 09:31:35 +0100

On Fri, 2 Aug 2019 at 13:25, Andrew Jones <address@hidden> wrote:
>
> Since Linux kernel v5.2-rc1 KVM has support for enabling SVE in guests.
> This series provides the QEMU bits for that enablement. First, we
> select existing CPU properties representing features we want to
> advertise in addition to the SVE vector lengths and prepare
> them for a qmp query. Then we introduce the qmp query, applying
> it immediately to those selected features. We also document ARM CPU
> features at this time. We next add a qtest for the selected CPU
> features that uses the qmp query for its tests - and we continue to
> add tests as we add CPU features with the following patches. So then,
> once we have the support we need for CPU feature querying and testing,
> we add our first SVE CPU feature property, 'sve', which just allows
> SVE to be completely enabled/disabled. Following that feature property,
> we add all 16 vector length properties along with the input validation
> they need and tests to prove the validation works. At this point the
> SVE features are still only for TCG, so we provide some patches to
> prepare for KVM and then a patch that allows the 'max' CPU type to
> enable SVE with KVM, but at first without vector length properties.
> After a bit more preparation we add the SVE vector length properties
> to the KVM-enabled 'max' CPU type along with the additional input
> validation and tests that that needs.  Finally we allow the 'host'
> CPU type to also enjoy these properties by simply sharing them with it.

Hi -- I see there have been some review comments on these patches
that mean there'll be a v4. In the meantime, patches 1, 2, 5, 6, 9, 10
seem to me to be independent bugfixes/cleanups that have been reviewed.
Would you like me to take those into target-arm.next to reduce the
size of the patchset for v4, or is that going to make rebasing
painful on your end?

thanks
-- PMM



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]