Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 0/7] unsafe big.LITTLE support

2018-03-12 Thread Julien Grall
Hi, On 12/03/18 02:57, Peng Fan wrote: Hi Stefano, On Fri, Mar 09, 2018 at 05:09:20PM -0800, Stefano Stabellini wrote: On Fri, 9 Mar 2018, Julien Grall wrote: Furthermore, the workaround is not in Linux upstream and I doubt this will be accepted as it is. So I am not convinced that we should

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 0/7] unsafe big.LITTLE support

2018-03-12 Thread Julien Grall
On 12/03/18 02:32, Peng Fan wrote: On Fri, Mar 09, 2018 at 02:40:25PM +, Julien Grall wrote: Hi, On 09/03/18 13:30, Peng Fan wrote: Hi Julien, On Fri, Mar 09, 2018 at 10:22:09AM +, Julien Grall wrote: Hi Peng, On 09/03/18 09:05, Peng Fan wrote: On Thu, Mar 08, 2018 at 03:13:50PM

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 0/7] unsafe big.LITTLE support

2018-03-11 Thread Peng Fan
Hi Stefano, On Fri, Mar 09, 2018 at 05:09:20PM -0800, Stefano Stabellini wrote: >On Fri, 9 Mar 2018, Julien Grall wrote: >> Furthermore, the workaround is not in Linux upstream and I doubt this will be >> accepted as it is. So I am not convinced that we should modify Xen interface >> for that. >>

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 0/7] unsafe big.LITTLE support

2018-03-11 Thread Peng Fan
On Fri, Mar 09, 2018 at 02:40:25PM +, Julien Grall wrote: >Hi, > >On 09/03/18 13:30, Peng Fan wrote: >>Hi Julien, >>On Fri, Mar 09, 2018 at 10:22:09AM +, Julien Grall wrote: >>>Hi Peng, >>> >>>On 09/03/18 09:05, Peng Fan wrote: On Thu, Mar 08, 2018 at 03:13:50PM +, Julien Grall

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 0/7] unsafe big.LITTLE support

2018-03-09 Thread Stefano Stabellini
On Fri, 9 Mar 2018, Julien Grall wrote: > Furthermore, the workaround is not in Linux upstream and I doubt this will be > accepted as it is. So I am not convinced that we should modify Xen interface > for that. > > Anyway, given that your silicon is going to be respined, then you probably > want

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 0/7] unsafe big.LITTLE support

2018-03-09 Thread Julien Grall
Hi, On 09/03/18 13:30, Peng Fan wrote: Hi Julien, On Fri, Mar 09, 2018 at 10:22:09AM +, Julien Grall wrote: Hi Peng, On 09/03/18 09:05, Peng Fan wrote: On Thu, Mar 08, 2018 at 03:13:50PM +, Julien Grall wrote: On 08/03/18 12:43, Peng Fan wrote: There are a major difference between

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 0/7] unsafe big.LITTLE support

2018-03-09 Thread Peng Fan
Hi Julien, On Fri, Mar 09, 2018 at 10:22:09AM +, Julien Grall wrote: >Hi Peng, > >On 09/03/18 09:05, Peng Fan wrote: >>On Thu, Mar 08, 2018 at 03:13:50PM +, Julien Grall wrote: >>>On 08/03/18 12:43, Peng Fan wrote: >>>There are a major difference between Dom0 and DomU in your setup.

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 0/7] unsafe big.LITTLE support

2018-03-09 Thread Julien Grall
Hi Peng, On 09/03/18 09:05, Peng Fan wrote: On Thu, Mar 08, 2018 at 03:13:50PM +, Julien Grall wrote: On 08/03/18 12:43, Peng Fan wrote: There are a major difference between Dom0 and DomU in your setup. Dom0 vCPUs are pinned to a specific pCPU, so they can't move around. For DomU, each

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 0/7] unsafe big.LITTLE support

2018-03-09 Thread Peng Fan
On Thu, Mar 08, 2018 at 03:13:50PM +, Julien Grall wrote: >Hi, > >On 08/03/18 12:43, Peng Fan wrote: >>I am not sure whether this issue cause DomU big/Little not work. > >Well, I would recommend to speak with NXP whether this errata affects >TLB flush for Hypervisor Page-Table

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 0/7] unsafe big.LITTLE support

2018-03-08 Thread Julien Grall
Hi, On 08/03/18 12:43, Peng Fan wrote: I am not sure whether this issue cause DomU big/Little not work. Well, I would recommend to speak with NXP whether this errata affects TLB flush for Hypervisor Page-Table or Stage-2 Page-Table. I tried the following, but no help. Not sure my patch is

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 0/7] unsafe big.LITTLE support

2018-03-08 Thread Peng Fan
l > >> Sent: 2018年3月8日 19:04 > >> To: Peng Fan <van.free...@gmail.com>; Stefano Stabellini > >> <sstabell...@kernel.org> > >> Cc: xen-de...@lists.xen.org > >> Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 0/7] unsafe big.LITTLE support > >> > &

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 0/7] unsafe big.LITTLE support

2018-03-08 Thread Julien Grall
ists.xen.org Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 0/7] unsafe big.LITTLE support Hello, On 08/03/18 06:15, Peng Fan wrote: Hi Stefano, On Fri, Mar 02, 2018 at 11:05:54AM -0800, Stefano Stabellini wrote: Hi all, This series changes the initialization of two virtual registers to make sure they mat

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 0/7] unsafe big.LITTLE support

2018-03-08 Thread Peng Fan
> Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 0/7] unsafe big.LITTLE support > > Hello, > > On 08/03/18 06:15, Peng Fan wrote: > > Hi Stefano, > > On Fri, Mar 02, 2018 at 11:05:54AM -0800, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > >> Hi all, > >> > >> This series cha

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 0/7] unsafe big.LITTLE support

2018-03-08 Thread Julien Grall
Hello, On 08/03/18 06:15, Peng Fan wrote: Hi Stefano, On Fri, Mar 02, 2018 at 11:05:54AM -0800, Stefano Stabellini wrote: Hi all, This series changes the initialization of two virtual registers to make sure they match the value of the underlying physical cpu. It also disables cpus different

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 0/7] unsafe big.LITTLE support

2018-03-07 Thread Peng Fan
Hi Stefano, On Fri, Mar 02, 2018 at 11:05:54AM -0800, Stefano Stabellini wrote: >Hi all, > >This series changes the initialization of two virtual registers to make >sure they match the value of the underlying physical cpu. > >It also disables cpus different from the boot cpu, unless a newly

[Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 0/7] unsafe big.LITTLE support

2018-03-02 Thread Stefano Stabellini
Hi all, This series changes the initialization of two virtual registers to make sure they match the value of the underlying physical cpu. It also disables cpus different from the boot cpu, unless a newly introduced command line option is specified. In that case, it explains how to setup the