lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Jul]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 08/36] AArch64: Kernel booting and initialisation
Hi Catalin,

On 07/20/2012 09:48 AM, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 06:31:07PM +0100, Christopher Covington wrote:
>> On 07/18/2012 02:57 AM, Jon Masters wrote:
>>> On 07/06/2012 05:05 PM, Catalin Marinas wrote:
>>>
>>>> +- CPU mode
>>>> + All forms of interrupts must be masked in PSTATE.DAIF (Debug, SError,
>>>> + IRQ and FIQ).
>>>> + The CPU must be in either EL2 (RECOMMENDED) or non-secure EL1.
>>
>> Why not secure EL1?
>
> Because the secure side does not have virtualisation extensions so you
> won't be able to run something like KVM.

This is another useful explanation to include, in my opinion.

>>> Even though this stuff is likely to be replaced with the result of some
>>> of the other standardization, I'd like it if you'd strongly consider
>>> removing the "or non-secure EL1". If you give an inch, someone will take
>>> a mile and build a system that enters other than in EL2. Or, something
>>> to the effect of "the highest non-secure exception level implemented"
>>> would be my preference if you don't want to specify.
>>
>> I think it would be best to list the technical limitations, from the
>> kernel's perspective, of the unsupported exception levels and the
>> advantages of the supported exception levels here. If you want to guide
>> system builders towards EL2, I think it'd be more convincing to document
>> the relevant technical aspects (perhaps KVM needs facilities only
>> available in EL2) than just providing an unexplained requirement.
>
> That's not meant to be an official document for SoC designers. It just
> states the requirements from the Linux kernel perspective. But ARM is
> producing platform design documents covering hardware and firmware
> requirements and these will be made available.

I agree that the main audience for this document should be kernel and
bootloader hackers and I now think I concentrated a little too much on
how my suggestions, meant to advocate for that audience, could be seen
as aligned with Jon's comment.

Christopher
--
Employee of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-07-20 17:21    [W:0.684 / U:0.316 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site