From: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
To: Koba Ko <kobak@nvidia.com>
Cc: Breno Leitao <leitao@debian.org>,
catalin.marinas@arm.com, robh@kernel.org, corbet@lwn.net,
skhan@linuxfoundation.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, fenghuay@nvidia.com,
tdave@nvidia.com, kaihengf@nvidia.com, rupakr@nvidia.com,
mohammedk@nvidia.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 1/3] arm64: add CPU prefetch and cache modulation sysfs interface
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2026 13:50:18 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <atDMCsj4yVnwhocf@willie-the-truck> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <179206734688.387067.11244555739178101423@nvidia.com>
On Thu, Oct 15, 2026 at 08:29:06PM +0800, Koba Ko wrote:
> Thanks for explaining the rebase, rollout and debugging costs of carrying
> this out of tree. That's useful context from someone using the patchset.
>
> CONFIG_EXPERT plus tainting on use could make experimental use more
> explicit. Those safeguards alone would not establish that firmware
> access, virtualization and runtime register updates are handled safely;
> the local restrictions still need validation against the hardware and
> firmware requirements.
>
> I'd like to hear Will's view on whether this opt-in approach could be
> acceptable in principle, and what requirements it would need to meet.
> I'm not planning to submit v3.
No, this isn't something we should be maintaining in the upstream kernel
and if we take this then we'll suddenly grow a zoo full of this stuff.
If Nvidia has imp-def controls that they believe are useful to expose to
userspace, then I suggest working with Arm to get something architectural
that we can support across different pieces of hardware and which would
integrate properly with the rest of the architecture (including things
like virtualisation and debug).
Will
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-10-15 12:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-08-25 18:16 [RFC PATCH v2 0/3] arm64: expose CPU prefetch and cache modulation controls Koba Ko
2026-08-25 18:16 ` [RFC PATCH v2 1/3] arm64: add CPU prefetch and cache modulation sysfs interface Koba Ko
2026-09-29 13:29 ` Will Deacon
2026-10-14 6:17 ` Koba Ko
2026-10-14 9:17 ` Breno Leitao
2026-10-15 12:29 ` Koba Ko
2026-10-15 12:50 ` Will Deacon [this message]
2026-08-25 18:17 ` [RFC PATCH v2 2/3] Documentation/arch/arm64: document arm_cpumod Koba Ko
2026-08-25 18:17 ` [RFC PATCH v2 3/3] selftests: arm64: add arm_cpumod kselftest Koba Ko
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=atDMCsj4yVnwhocf@willie-the-truck \
--to=will@kernel.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=fenghuay@nvidia.com \
--cc=kaihengf@nvidia.com \
--cc=kobak@nvidia.com \
--cc=leitao@debian.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mohammedk@nvidia.com \
--cc=robh@kernel.org \
--cc=rupakr@nvidia.com \
--cc=skhan@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=tdave@nvidia.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®