Hi Julien,

> On Nov 7, 2023, at 00:53, Julien Grall <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> 
>>> I think the series is now fully acked. But I will wait for 4.18 to be 
>>> released before merging this series.
>> I think the third patch "xen/arm: Fold mmu_init_secondary_cpu() to head.S” 
>> will need the
>> double check from your side :)
> 
> Oh yes :).
> 
>> Here is what I have locally, to save time I will just show the content here 
>> for you to check,
>> and I will push it in the next few days:
>> commit ba72d6dc17fd7ce9a863b9e00b06b33c069c7641
>> Author: Henry Wang <[email protected]>
>> Date:   Wed Aug 23 17:59:50 2023 +0800
>>     xen/arm: Fold mmu_init_secondary_cpu() to head.S
>>     Currently mmu_init_secondary_cpu() only enforces the page table
>>     should not contain mapping that are both Writable and eXecutables
>>     after boot. To ease the arch/arm/mm.c split work, fold this function
>>     to head.S.
>>     For arm32, the WXN bit cannot be set early because at the point when
>>     the MMU is enabled, the page-tables may still contain mapping which
>>     are writable and executable. Therefore, introduce an assembly macro
>>     pt_enforce_wxn. The macro is called before secondary CPUs jumping
>>     into the C world.
>>     For arm64, set the SCTLR_Axx_ELx_WXN flag right when the MMU is
>>     enabled. This would avoid the extra TLB flush and SCTLR dance.
>>     Signed-off-by: Henry Wang <[email protected]>
>>     Co-authored-by: Julien Grall <[email protected]>
>>     Signed-off-by: Julien Grall <[email protected]>
>>     Signed-off-by: Ayan Kumar Halder <[email protected]>
> 
> The commit message is clearer. Thanks! Feel free to add my tag for the next 
> version:
> 
> Reviewed-by: Julien Grall <[email protected]>

Thank you very much! I will send a v9 with all stuff sorted.

Note for myself is that this series should have some conflict with Leo’s series 
for AVA, so
I should do a proper rebase based on the order of merging these two series.

Kind regards,
Henry

> 
> Cheers,
> 
> -- 
> Julien Grall
> 

Reply via email to