On Fri, 7 Dec 2018, Julien Grall wrote:
> Hi Stefano,
>
> On 06/12/2018 22:04, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > On Wed, 5 Dec 2018, Julien Grall wrote:
> > > On 04/12/2018 23:59, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > > > On Tue, 4 Dec 2018, Julien Grall wrote:
> > > > > A follow-up patch will re-purpose the
Hi Stefano,
On 06/12/2018 22:04, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Wed, 5 Dec 2018, Julien Grall wrote:
On 04/12/2018 23:59, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Tue, 4 Dec 2018, Julien Grall wrote:
A follow-up patch will re-purpose the valid bit of LPAE entries to
generate fault even on entry containing
On Wed, 5 Dec 2018, Julien Grall wrote:
> On 04/12/2018 23:59, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > On Tue, 4 Dec 2018, Julien Grall wrote:
> > > A follow-up patch will re-purpose the valid bit of LPAE entries to
> > > generate fault even on entry containing valid information.
> > >
> > > This means
On 04/12/2018 23:59, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Tue, 4 Dec 2018, Julien Grall wrote:
A follow-up patch will re-purpose the valid bit of LPAE entries to
generate fault even on entry containing valid information.
This means that when translating a guest VA to guest PA (e.g IPA) will
fail if
On Tue, 4 Dec 2018, Julien Grall wrote:
> A follow-up patch will re-purpose the valid bit of LPAE entries to
> generate fault even on entry containing valid information.
>
> This means that when translating a guest VA to guest PA (e.g IPA) will
> fail if the Stage-2 entries used have the valid
A follow-up patch will re-purpose the valid bit of LPAE entries to
generate fault even on entry containing valid information.
This means that when translating a guest VA to guest PA (e.g IPA) will
fail if the Stage-2 entries used have the valid bit unset. Because of
that, we need to fallback to
