From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from esa9.hc1455-7.c3s2.iphmx.com (esa9.hc1455-7.c3s2.iphmx.com [139.138.36.223]) (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 7ABF32EB856; Thu, 23 Jul 2026 09:02:56 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=139.138.36.223 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1784797378; cv=none; b=Aa9dGyfM6L6ICvq3WR5t9QBQskh6rk80HKqra063lJUUkglb5lmwBovn58WGE2SjKA0Xf2a/+2sTJNOaeVQfRnlRbdDbkZppMHq7ybSniDhHzay7it2BNVkgCX1yEz3OQgQUPlRYoW0jhv4E1gJGJEv9cbGkirjISM9sdkRvbIE= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1784797378; c=relaxed/simple; bh=QlInud9zY6Zj2WAQdHZwDimVEk6ix99BMpZJ6uDFG4c=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=CZkptbfMV76wGgXdR50WIJoGCDRlZFCbl274aZkYAvX8U8Vb34Bgx2kCiaYgx5H0uQhlS5mRIqqE4MXeFKU6K7I0gGEWQDDnnYUHUkGzBWoQsZ9+ibLjF0KY+THucghoN2mpZ8pyHGOTjs8xAoRgWx9PQUsnKvkHR8cH0Bbk9HU= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=fujitsu.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=fujitsu.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=fujitsu.com header.i=@fujitsu.com header.b=G6tRcHrH; arc=none smtp.client-ip=139.138.36.223 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=fujitsu.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=fujitsu.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=fujitsu.com header.i=@fujitsu.com header.b="G6tRcHrH" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=fujitsu.com; i=@fujitsu.com; q=dns/txt; s=fj2; t=1784797376; x=1816333376; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=QlInud9zY6Zj2WAQdHZwDimVEk6ix99BMpZJ6uDFG4c=; b=G6tRcHrHByIOVXo4lCtKQcsIzrG+IUMTfS8/OOrrrp0dpl9OOHn7dI+m gl9E4IYtJW5ohw1Z3GbSoKZsKxPm1LJY0wAkSJ9GU5zU9IVooWQ8Gp2Cs uT3DLNdATJwCVSi9PtWwSadMJXxM9cKujxSAgwrpIjffZZYvZuI6Xl77F 15jx+a84S4gnqRCPoWCESOSz5dEAyyIL16yeK9dk1leayMNILCBH9K6LC rJhN1hgD5QgNDY/0L+MZgaBa4ZK2rGT/VW9UIYZTCQ6T7ud2HByQDp9qS oN7FpVElzicMzpV5I1UCjl79VBWsYL+9lD9tFZW2mS/cpi/Vhg9t8y8DV w==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: ryjHRmm/SBy4J6WcCu+joQ== X-CSE-MsgGUID: l4O+uCr9QZyED3Clyu+v6w== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6800,10657,11854"; a="235787159" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.25,180,1779116400"; d="scan'208";a="235787159" Received: from gmgwnl01.global.fujitsu.com ([52.143.17.124]) by esa9.hc1455-7.c3s2.iphmx.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 23 Jul 2026 18:02:49 +0900 Received: from az2nlsmgm2.o.css.fujitsu.com (unknown [10.150.26.202]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by gmgwnl01.global.fujitsu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5C4FD42A308; Thu, 23 Jul 2026 09:02:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: from az2uksmom4.o.css.fujitsu.com (unknown [10.151.22.204]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by az2nlsmgm2.o.css.fujitsu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 030591C0CAE8; Thu, 23 Jul 2026 09:02:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: from FCCLS0092175.localdomain (unknown [10.10.80.137]) by az2uksmom4.o.css.fujitsu.com (Postfix) with SMTP id B285540267C; Thu, 23 Jul 2026 09:02:40 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2026 18:02:33 +0900 From: Kohei Enju To: Marc Zyngier Cc: Steven Price , kvm@vger.kernel.org, kvmarm@lists.linux.dev, Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , James Morse , Oliver Upton , Suzuki K Poulose , Zenghui Yu , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Joey Gouly , Alexandru Elisei , Christoffer Dall , Fuad Tabba , linux-coco@lists.linux.dev, Ganapatrao Kulkarni , Gavin Shan , Shanker Donthineni , Alper Gun , "Aneesh Kumar K . V" , Emi Kisanuki , Vishal Annapurve , WeiLin.Chang@arm.com, Lorenzo Pieralisi Subject: Re: [PATCH v15 12/37] KVM: arm64: CCA: Support the VGIC in realms Message-ID: References: <20260715142841.80544-1-steven.price@arm.com> <20260715142841.80544-13-steven.price@arm.com> <86cxwfe5m8.wl-maz@kernel.org> <868q72dt8o.wl-maz@kernel.org> 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=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <868q72dt8o.wl-maz@kernel.org> On 07/23 09:07, Marc Zyngier wrote: > On Thu, 23 Jul 2026 07:38:16 +0100, > Kohei Enju wrote: > > > > On 07/22 10:27, Marc Zyngier wrote: > > > > > > > > As far as I can tell, the CCA requirements don't require the > > > > ARM64_HAS_ICH_HCR_EL2_TDIR feature. If that's the case, this seems to be a > > > > problem. Is there any workaround for this issue, or should we implement trap > > > > handlers for those registers? > > > > > > No. Either you support TDIR, like any modern CPU, or you don't run > > > CCA. I'm not adding yet another level of emulation for this. > > > > However, I'm still not aware of any requirement in the CCA architecture, > > or in Armv8-A/Armv9-A, that mandates TDIR support. > > The GICv3 architecture has deprecated the lack of TDIR support since > the very first release of the specification in 2015, because it was > quickly identified as an architecture bug. CCA mandates GICv3 support > as written in the spec, and relying on deprecated features 11 years > later is not acceptable. > > By any definition, this is buggy hardware, and I don't feel a strong > urge to support it. > > > > > When you say "you don't run CCA", is that because the architecture > > requires it, > > See above. > > > or because that's the current KVM policy? If it's the > > latter, we'd be interested in adding the required emulation to make it > > work. > > And I say no to this. Enough. This isn't a "policy*. This is a hard > red line. "Do Not Cross". > > We already have the most complicated interrupt architecture ever, and > I have zero desire to add even more complexity to it. Because I'm the > idiot who ends-up maintaining this horror, and not you. > > So no, no more emulation code. CCA in KVM won't handle systems that do > not support TDIR, unless you rewrite the CCA support so that it can > use the *existing* emulation code without any change. Understood. Thanks for the clarification. Thanks, Kohei > > Thanks, > > M. > > -- > Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible. >