On Mon, Nov 01, 2021 at 02:32:34PM +0000, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
[...]
What is the point in a non present bit that must always be zero? I assume this is about leaving space for a future physical hotplug but even so it seems unwise to drop in a field that must be zero. My inclination is don't define this bit until you need it - will be reserved 0 anyway so I'm not sure I see why it needs reserving.
Not-present is there to explain/clarify what "enabled" means, it is a clarification and not strictly necessary (I mean a clarification of sorts is needed in the spec anyway).
Agreed that a clarification is good but not necessarily this one.
Updated. Added as a clarification in the MADT GICC paragraph rather than a flag.
Agreed that we need to coordinate efforts to get this enabled upstream.
Yes, let's get at least the online-capable/enabled changes in the specs (which is already proving to be interesting).
Good luck.
Fingers crossed - we should be done and soon ready to upstream.
It would be good to nudge Kubernetes folks (but Salil should know already) to get their opinion on the resulting flow.
The main difference with his initial kernel work is that now all cpus are present and possible, I don't see any issue with that but we can check.
Side note, the link to the mantis ticket form the bugzilla is broken (has a bonus 'v' on the end I think...)
Commented on the entry to fix it, thanks.
Lorenzo
Jonathan
Lorenzo
Jonathan
Thanks,
Jonathan
Linaro-open-discussions mailing list https://collaborate.linaro.org/display/LOD/Linaro+Open+Discussions+Home https://op-lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-open-discussions