From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [192.198.163.14]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A363C36CE0E; Wed, 20 Aug 2025 23:05:19 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.14 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1755731121; cv=none; b=XuhoBn2GF1938/rTP+q7Qh9vFeS6Cz74T352gX7IfXnGNlxWvGzkrtxYWNM+eJv2xLwYBm/mmnyRj9qJxsT1B7+F4D4xB6MAy+qMbq3TI7SgS6H+ns7a5GlAujkv1QCBE08oxp642Rz1UlXBgFRtusEIz/gioJHxAjV13nkUzQI= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1755731121; c=relaxed/simple; bh=nr1/ZpykDzY/GfAUTO5xatJNE5SpOD44gVut+/do0Kk=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=mQ20umf9qI5kGr0u9doN/ic0W1hNg7+JVWz/0BszMzHh/USkUTcaPVekw9861m7K9i42gESMJDkYRGcb4tPAjI7Ujygo3xS8is1QpAVjLP6LXisBpr5GSstmDdp744OZmC2M6EbqONv2LFGF/trAasZSLgj5SSY5gJ0gGLFH0ws= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b=C4dCd2Um; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.14 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="C4dCd2Um" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1755731120; x=1787267120; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=nr1/ZpykDzY/GfAUTO5xatJNE5SpOD44gVut+/do0Kk=; b=C4dCd2UmGtXN46RBBUSBVDEY8Z5B2iM72k6mkDEMCRSDUg97eqhUcanL mviEzwdLiW9w01FJkT//Pewebf6ziyIkmzcGMNYdht0penIZvhe2WpFGU 3UPaY/I95+lz5mrbXjIYYkFAOtc9sqZVYsPHVWyMFkxgfr4oKVQbgou8p h4mPnoEmmiLvHKd6ESCIOmKDzL/ItV61U/vqRRottMZG27CRmHsWR7Msn YXqFntiVkyYUo+XCW6uHE8t0lD76hEh8LpOybV8mYuQUz2CT7px8dEnML ID0ciV40alN9Hl0TKR28yDjkEDmXBCBaM72TyQ74pky+Mbz/tw7zvMbA+ Q==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: xsPSMkO4RdGgeJ90vBOHng== X-CSE-MsgGUID: qayqUP8GT3mcse3M6xmQKQ== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6800,10657,11527"; a="58080239" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.17,306,1747724400"; d="scan'208";a="58080239" Received: from orviesa002.jf.intel.com ([10.64.159.142]) by fmvoesa108.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 20 Aug 2025 16:05:19 -0700 X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: 5wTcD2vyQQmnoR1aFrmA/A== X-CSE-MsgGUID: D3ukZWbfTly7d+vDz1QS3w== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.17,306,1747724400"; d="scan'208";a="199234003" Received: from ranerica-svr.sc.intel.com ([172.25.110.23]) by orviesa002.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 20 Aug 2025 16:05:18 -0700 Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2025 16:11:35 -0700 From: Ricardo Neri To: x86@kernel.org, Krzysztof Kozlowski , Conor Dooley , Rob Herring , "K. Y. Srinivasan" , Haiyang Zhang , Wei Liu , Dexuan Cui , Michael Kelley , "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: Saurabh Sengar , Chris Oo , "Kirill A. Shutemov" , linux-hyperv@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ricardo Neri , Yunhong Jiang , Thomas Gleixner Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 00/10] x86/hyperv/hv_vtl: Use a wakeup mailbox to boot secondary CPUs Message-ID: <20250820231135.GA24797@ranerica-svr.sc.intel.com> References: <20250627-rneri-wakeup-mailbox-v5-0-df547b1d196e@linux.intel.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20250627-rneri-wakeup-mailbox-v5-0-df547b1d196e@linux.intel.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28) On Fri, Jun 27, 2025 at 08:35:06PM -0700, Ricardo Neri wrote: > Hi, > > Here is a new version of this series. Thanks to Rafael for his feedback! > I incorporated his feedback in this updated version. Please see the > changelog for details. > > If the DeviceTree bindings look good, then the patches should be ready for > review by the x86, ACPI, and Hyper-V maintainers. > > I did not change the cover letter but I included it here for completeness. > > Thanks in advance for your feedback! Hello, I would like to know what else is needed to move this patchset forward. Rafael and Rob have reviewed the DeviceTree bindings. Rafael has reviewed the relocation of the code that makes use of the mailbox. Would it be possible for the Hyper-V maintainers to take a look (Michael Kelley has reviewed the patches already)? Perhaps this could increase the confidence of the x86 maintainers. Thanks! Ricardo