[RFC PATCH v1 0/3] Update tlb invalidation routines for FEAT_LPA2

[Ryan Roberts]

On 13/11/2023 17:49, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 13, 2023 at 04:44:58PM +0000, Ryan Roberts wrote:
>> On 13/11/2023 13:27, Catalin Marinas wrote:
>>> If these patches are needed for Ard's series (I think they do), they
>>> could be posted together. But first we need to split Ard's series into
>>> at least two: reworking the memory map together with moving (some of)
>>> the init code to C and the actual LPA2 stage 1 support. We might even
>>> through LPA2 stage 2 on top if we feel brave ;). We can queue them all
>>> together but having separate series gives us an option to drop bits if
>>> needed.
>>
>> Sorry I'm not completely sure what you are suggesting I do here. In the context
>> of the lpa2/kvm series, Marc previously said he would merge it for v6.8 if I
>> posted against v6.7-rc1 (which is what I'm gearing up for now).
> 
> If we merge your series independently of Ard's, that's fine, these three
> patches can go together as a prefix.
> 
>> My series and Ard's are independent except that they both depend on the 3
>> patches in this RFC. Ard has just suggested he would prefix his series with
>> these 3 patches and I would continue to do the same, then they can be handled as
>> 2 independent series (or more if Ard is splitting his) - the first 3 patches
>> will just desolve to nothing for the series that goes in second.
>>
>> Does that work for you, are are you suggesting I should re-post this as an
>> independent series?
> 
> No need to. Just post your LPA2 patches with these three as a prefix.
> Ard can include them as well and if it gets to merging both, we'll sort
> out a small stable branch for these three patches.
> 

Great - thanks for the clarification!