- Linaro-open-discussions - op-lists.linaro.org

Re: [Linaro-open-discussions] ACPI based Virtual CPU Hotplug (possible specification) Follow-up - Suggested Agenda / timings for Monday 7 Dec call

by Jonathan Cameron

On Tue, 2 Feb 2021 17:18:28 +0000 Jon Masters via Linaro-open-discussions <linaro-open-discussions(a)op-lists.linaro.org> wrote: > +1 to the CXL discussion > > On Tue, Feb 2, 2021 at 12:14 PM Lorenzo Pieralisi via > Linaro-open-discussions <linaro-open-discussions(a)op-lists.linaro.org> wrote: > > > On Tue, Feb 02, 2021 at 08:43:39AM +0000, Salil Mehta wrote: > > > > > > > From: Linaro-open-discussions > > > > [mailto:linaro-open-discussions-bounces@op-lists.linaro.org] On > > Behalf Of > > > > Lorenzo Pieralisi via Linaro-open-discussions > > > > Sent: Thursday, January 7, 2021 10:55 AM > > > > To: Jonathan Cameron <jonathan.cameron(a)huawei.com> > > > > Cc: Mike Holmes via Linaro-open-discussions > > > > <linaro-open-discussions(a)op-lists.linaro.org> > > > > Subject: Re: [Linaro-open-discussions] Suggested Agenda / timings for > > Monday > > > > 7 Dec call > > > > > > > > On Wed, Dec 09, 2020 at 09:14:46AM +0000, Jonathan Cameron via > > > > Linaro-open-discussions wrote: > > > > > On Wed, 9 Dec 2020 08:35:57 +0000 > > > > > Mike Holmes via Linaro-open-discussions > > > > <linaro-open-discussions(a)op-lists.linaro.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 8:19 AM Vincent Guittot via > > Linaro-open-discussions > > > > < > > > > > > linaro-open-discussions(a)op-lists.linaro.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, 8 Dec 2020 at 18:02, Lorenzo Pieralisi via > > > > > > > Linaro-open-discussions < > > linaro-open-discussions(a)op-lists.linaro.org> > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Dec 03, 2020 at 01:40:55PM +0000, Jonathan Cameron > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi All, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The previous thread has gotten rather convoluted, so I'm > > going to have > > > > > > > a go at extracting > > > > > > > > > a brief summary of topics and suggesting some straw man > > timings. > > > > > > > > > These are all discussion topics, so name just indicates who > > I think > > > > > > > will do the intro. > > > > > > > > > Note I'd suggest we keep fairly tightly to timings and if it > > looks > > > > > > > like a particular > > > > > > > > > conversation is going long, we schedule a follow up. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Jonathan, all, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > thanks for the sync-up yesterday, I have already started > > following up > > > > > > > > on some topics (ACPI CPU hotplug). > > > > > > > > > Hi Lorenzo, > > > As a follow-up to our last meeting, do we have any updates from your > > > internal discussions in regards to the support of ACPI based Virtual > > > CPU Hotplug or its "possible" specification? :) > > > > I am following up on it, should be able to give an update next LOD > > on Feb 22nd if that's OK. > > > > Side note: I would be really grateful if we could run a CXL > > overview/sync-up on the Feb 22nd, given that the enablement code > > is being upstreamed. Sure, though there are large parts of that which need figuring out yet even if current stuff is fine. Jonathan > > > > Thanks, > > Lorenzo > > -- > > Linaro-open-discussions mailing list > > https://collaborate.linaro.org/display/LOD/Linaro+Open+Discussions+Home > > https://op-lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-open-discussions > >

4 years, 4 months

1
0
0 0

Re: [Linaro-open-discussions] ACPI based Virtual CPU Hotplug (possible specification) Follow-up - Suggested Agenda / timings for Monday 7 Dec call

by Jon Masters

+1 to the CXL discussion On Tue, Feb 2, 2021 at 12:14 PM Lorenzo Pieralisi via Linaro-open-discussions <linaro-open-discussions(a)op-lists.linaro.org> wrote: > On Tue, Feb 02, 2021 at 08:43:39AM +0000, Salil Mehta wrote: > > > > > From: Linaro-open-discussions > > > [mailto:linaro-open-discussions-bounces@op-lists.linaro.org] On > Behalf Of > > > Lorenzo Pieralisi via Linaro-open-discussions > > > Sent: Thursday, January 7, 2021 10:55 AM > > > To: Jonathan Cameron <jonathan.cameron(a)huawei.com> > > > Cc: Mike Holmes via Linaro-open-discussions > > > <linaro-open-discussions(a)op-lists.linaro.org> > > > Subject: Re: [Linaro-open-discussions] Suggested Agenda / timings for > Monday > > > 7 Dec call > > > > > > On Wed, Dec 09, 2020 at 09:14:46AM +0000, Jonathan Cameron via > > > Linaro-open-discussions wrote: > > > > On Wed, 9 Dec 2020 08:35:57 +0000 > > > > Mike Holmes via Linaro-open-discussions > > > <linaro-open-discussions(a)op-lists.linaro.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 8:19 AM Vincent Guittot via > Linaro-open-discussions > > > < > > > > > linaro-open-discussions(a)op-lists.linaro.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, 8 Dec 2020 at 18:02, Lorenzo Pieralisi via > > > > > > Linaro-open-discussions < > linaro-open-discussions(a)op-lists.linaro.org> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Dec 03, 2020 at 01:40:55PM +0000, Jonathan Cameron > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi All, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The previous thread has gotten rather convoluted, so I'm > going to have > > > > > > a go at extracting > > > > > > > > a brief summary of topics and suggesting some straw man > timings. > > > > > > > > These are all discussion topics, so name just indicates who > I think > > > > > > will do the intro. > > > > > > > > Note I'd suggest we keep fairly tightly to timings and if it > looks > > > > > > like a particular > > > > > > > > conversation is going long, we schedule a follow up. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Jonathan, all, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > thanks for the sync-up yesterday, I have already started > following up > > > > > > > on some topics (ACPI CPU hotplug). > > > > > > Hi Lorenzo, > > As a follow-up to our last meeting, do we have any updates from your > > internal discussions in regards to the support of ACPI based Virtual > > CPU Hotplug or its "possible" specification? :) > > I am following up on it, should be able to give an update next LOD > on Feb 22nd if that's OK. > > Side note: I would be really grateful if we could run a CXL > overview/sync-up on the Feb 22nd, given that the enablement code > is being upstreamed. > > Thanks, > Lorenzo > -- > Linaro-open-discussions mailing list > https://collaborate.linaro.org/display/LOD/Linaro+Open+Discussions+Home > https://op-lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-open-discussions >

4 years, 4 months

1
0
0 0

Fwd: Linaro OP-TEE Contributions meeting January 2021

by Ruchika Gupta

Hi, We have a LOC Monthly meeting scheduled for Thursday January 28th(a)16.00. Please see the details below. Regards, Ruchika ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Joakim Bech via OP-TEE <op-tee(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2021 at 21:38 Subject: Linaro OP-TEE Contributions meeting January 2021 To: OP-TEE TrustedFirmware <op-tee(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> Hi, LOC monthly meeting is planned to take place Thursday January 28th(a)16.00 (UTC+1). This time we have two guest speakers, with two different topics. - Clément Faure (NXP): HW crypto accelerator integration with crypto framework in OP-TEE - Sumit Garg (Linaro): TEE based Trusted Keys This might take the whole meeting, but feel free to suggest topics you'd like to discuss otherwise (by replying to this email or write it directly in the meeting notes). Meeting details: --------------- Date/time: Thursday January 28th(a)16.00 (UTC+1) https://everytimezone.com/s/c43ea835 Connection details: https://www.trustedfirmware.org/meetings/ Meeting notes: http://bit.ly/loc-notes Project page: https://www.linaro.org/projects/#LOC Regards, Joakim on behalf of the Linaro OP-TEE team

4 years, 4 months

1
0
0 0

Any interest in discussing LBI-51 (Lightweight KVM/VirtIO build of QEMU)

by Alex Bennée

Hi, As Linaro Big Ideas aren't meant to hang around too long I wanted to do a call to see if there was any interest in taking this further. Feedback so far has been it look interesting and certainly looks useful from the upstream point of view but generally members have other plans (rust-vmm based solutions, kvmtool etc). From an engineering point of view I still think there is use in having a slimmed down build of QEMU for ARM if only to have something to benchmark against when developing the new shiny tools. So what do people think? Worth having a call and firming up an initiative for voting on or clsong the card due to lack of interest? -- Alex Bennée

4 years, 5 months

2
4
0 0

Re: [Linaro-open-discussions] Linaro Open Discussions Kernel topics - Meeting Notes 2021-1-11

by Jammy Zhou

If we cannot make it for 8th, I agree with Jonathan that 22nd can be a better option. As to the time wise, I would keep it as it is now and adjust it later based on attendees for specific topics if any. On Thu, 14 Jan 2021 at 19:01, Jonathan Cameron via Linaro-open-discussions < linaro-open-discussions(a)op-lists.linaro.org> wrote: > On Thu, 14 Jan 2021 09:41:05 +0000 > Lorenzo Pieralisi via Linaro-open-discussions < > linaro-open-discussions(a)op-lists.linaro.org> wrote: > > > On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 02:29:16PM +0000, Mike Holmes via > Linaro-open-discussions wrote: > > > Thanks all for another good discussion today, notes on the main topic > of > > > the cluster-aware scheduler are here [1] > > > > > > The next call is tentatively set for a month from now, on February 8th > > > 2021 at 10.00 am GMT*, please bring forward any topics for that call > > > (or any suggestions for a different or earlier call). > > > > Hi Mike, > > > > thank you. I can't make that week - if possible I would move it to > > February 15th please depending on whether that's OK with others. > > > > Timezone-wise it would be good if we could accommodate also developers > > from the western hemisphere but moving it to an afternoon call (in GMT) > > would certainly upset people in the eastern timezones. > > > > Open to suggestions. > > > > Thank you very much all. > > Hi. As someone mentioned on the last call the dates are very near to the > Chinese > New Year. I've just checked with my China based colleagues and they > advise against > any meetings between the 10th and the 18th of February. > > So perhaps we fall back to the 22nd for the normal scheduled meeting, > keeping in mind > that we may want to do an additional one for the scheduler topic before > then. > > Time wise, I think we will have to be flexible dependent on the agenda for > a give call. > At times we may have to even do repeated calls, though those are less than > ideal. > > Jonathan > > > > > > Lorenzo > > > > > Mike > > > > > > [1] > > > > https://collaborate.linaro.org/display/LOD/2021-1-11+Meeting+Meeting+notes > > > * Note that Chinese New year will start on February 11th 2021 > > > -- > > > Mike Holmes | Director, Foundation Technologies, Linaro > > > Mike.Holmes(a)linaro.org <mike.holmes(a)linaro.org> > > > "Work should be fun and collaborative, the rest follows" > > > -- > > > Linaro-open-discussions mailing list > > > > https://collaborate.linaro.org/display/LOD/Linaro+Open+Discussions+Home > > > https://op-lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-open-discussions > > -- > Linaro-open-discussions mailing list > https://collaborate.linaro.org/display/LOD/Linaro+Open+Discussions+Home > https://op-lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-open-discussions >

4 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

Re: [Linaro-open-discussions] Linaro Open Discussions Kernel topics - Meeting Notes 2021-1-11

by Jonathan Cameron

On Thu, 14 Jan 2021 09:41:05 +0000 Lorenzo Pieralisi via Linaro-open-discussions <linaro-open-discussions(a)op-lists.linaro.org> wrote: > On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 02:29:16PM +0000, Mike Holmes via Linaro-open-discussions wrote: > > Thanks all for another good discussion today, notes on the main topic of > > the cluster-aware scheduler are here [1] > > > > The next call is tentatively set for a month from now, on February 8th > > 2021 at 10.00 am GMT*, please bring forward any topics for that call > > (or any suggestions for a different or earlier call). > > Hi Mike, > > thank you. I can't make that week - if possible I would move it to > February 15th please depending on whether that's OK with others. > > Timezone-wise it would be good if we could accommodate also developers > from the western hemisphere but moving it to an afternoon call (in GMT) > would certainly upset people in the eastern timezones. > > Open to suggestions. > > Thank you very much all. Hi. As someone mentioned on the last call the dates are very near to the Chinese New Year. I've just checked with my China based colleagues and they advise against any meetings between the 10th and the 18th of February. So perhaps we fall back to the 22nd for the normal scheduled meeting, keeping in mind that we may want to do an additional one for the scheduler topic before then. Time wise, I think we will have to be flexible dependent on the agenda for a give call. At times we may have to even do repeated calls, though those are less than ideal. Jonathan > > Lorenzo > > > Mike > > > > [1] > > https://collaborate.linaro.org/display/LOD/2021-1-11+Meeting+Meeting+notes > > * Note that Chinese New year will start on February 11th 2021 > > -- > > Mike Holmes | Director, Foundation Technologies, Linaro > > Mike.Holmes(a)linaro.org <mike.holmes(a)linaro.org> > > "Work should be fun and collaborative, the rest follows" > > -- > > Linaro-open-discussions mailing list > > https://collaborate.linaro.org/display/LOD/Linaro+Open+Discussions+Home > > https://op-lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-open-discussions

4 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

Re: [Linaro-open-discussions] Linaro Open Discussions Kernel topics - Meeting Notes 2021-1-11

by Lorenzo Pieralisi

On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 02:29:16PM +0000, Mike Holmes via Linaro-open-discussions wrote: > Thanks all for another good discussion today, notes on the main topic of > the cluster-aware scheduler are here [1] > > The next call is tentatively set for a month from now, on February 8th > 2021 at 10.00 am GMT*, please bring forward any topics for that call > (or any suggestions for a different or earlier call). Hi Mike, thank you. I can't make that week - if possible I would move it to February 15th please depending on whether that's OK with others. Timezone-wise it would be good if we could accommodate also developers from the western hemisphere but moving it to an afternoon call (in GMT) would certainly upset people in the eastern timezones. Open to suggestions. Thank you very much all. Lorenzo > Mike > > [1] > https://collaborate.linaro.org/display/LOD/2021-1-11+Meeting+Meeting+notes > * Note that Chinese New year will start on February 11th 2021 > -- > Mike Holmes | Director, Foundation Technologies, Linaro > Mike.Holmes(a)linaro.org <mike.holmes(a)linaro.org> > "Work should be fun and collaborative, the rest follows" > -- > Linaro-open-discussions mailing list > https://collaborate.linaro.org/display/LOD/Linaro+Open+Discussions+Home > https://op-lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-open-discussions

4 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

QEMU's next v8-A emulation model

by Alex Bennée

Hi, There has been some discussion on the card QEMU-414: https://projects.linaro.org/browse/QEMU-414 about adding another CPU model to QEMU that is somewhat more advanced than the current v8.0 offerings but isn't quite the rolling "all the ARM you can eat" -cpu max. So far the primary interest I'm aware of has come from people working on the SBSA and BSA reference platforms who want to have something with a few more features than the base v8.0 spec which we have covered. So far we have been mostly focused on adding architectural features that are of direct interest to kernel and user space developers. This has allowed testing of code that uses SVE, MTE and BTI instructions. However there are no real CPUs that have quite the "random" assortment of ARM features QEMU currently implements. Implementing a new CPU model is not free either. We would have to back fill features we have currently skipped - some fairly simple and others not so much. We might also have to implement new on-chip devices (for example GICv4). We are also not interested in implementing a "only in QEMU" chip that has no real world analogue. However to decide on real world chip to model we need to gather requirements about what is it potential users need in this model? What architectural features are most interesting and what real world chip meets them? I would like to here any feedback and maybe this could be a topic for a future sync-up call? -- Alex Bennée

4 years, 5 months

3
3
0 0

Re: [Linaro-open-discussions] QEMU's next v8-A emulation model

by Jonathan Cameron

On Mon, 7 Dec 2020 10:07:44 +0000 Marcin Juszkiewicz via Linaro-open-discussions <linaro-open-discussions(a)op-lists.linaro.org> wrote: > W dniu 03.12.2020 o 22:21, Alex Bennée pisze: > > > There has been some discussion on the card QEMU-414: > > > > https://projects.linaro.org/browse/QEMU-414 > > > > about adding another CPU model to QEMU that is somewhat more advanced > > than the current v8.0 offerings but isn't quite the rolling "all the ARM > > you can eat" -cpu max. So far the primary interest I'm aware of has come > > from people working on the SBSA and BSA reference platforms who want to > > have something with a few more features than the base v8.0 spec which we > > have covered. > > > > So far we have been mostly focused on adding architectural features that > > are of direct interest to kernel and user space developers. This has > > allowed testing of code that uses SVE, MTE and BTI instructions. However > > there are no real CPUs that have quite the "random" assortment of > > ARM features QEMU currently implements. > > Something like Cortex-A76/78 would be nice. v8.2 with RAS, VHE, VMID16, > SMMUv3, PMUv3p1 etc. > > Several features are required by either BSA or higher levels of SBSA > specs. For example crypto (SHA3, SHA512, SM3, SM4), SVE, MTE or Pointer > Authentication. > > v8.5 added cache speculation side-channel attack migitations and they > are required by BSA and SBSA level 6. They probably do not matter in > QEMU but could be checked for existence. > > BSA mentions CBSA specification but it is not public yet so no > information what requirements it adds. > > As any Arm licensee can choose which features they add to base v8.2 core > I think that QEMU can have cortex-a76 with some selected features added > on top (versioned or not - depends on QEMU devs decision). > > I attached HTML table with BSA and SBSA requirements which may be > helpful with finding out which cpu/system features are required by > specifications. It will be updated once CBSA gets published (or any new > similar spec). > > > Implementing a new CPU model is not free either. We would have to back > > fill features we have currently skipped - some fairly simple and others > > not so much. We might also have to implement new on-chip devices (for > > example GICv4). We are also not interested in implementing a "only in > > QEMU" chip that has no real world analogue. > > > However to decide on real world chip to model we need to gather > > requirements about what is it potential users need in this model? What > > architectural features are most interesting and what real world chip > > meets them? > > SBSA Level 4 requires v8.3, SMMU v3 and GIC v3. Next levels bump CPU to > v8.4/8.5 and SMMU to v3.2 while keeping GIC at v3. > > BSA also mentions only GIC v2/v2m/v3. I forgot to feedback on this one having pestered a few people. Generally it's features Huawei teams are interested in rather than emulating a specific processor core or even SBSA level. If the gap happens to become trivial enough it might be worth filling in the holes. Jonathan

4 years, 5 months

2
2
0 0

Linaro Open Discussions Kernel topics - Meeting Notes 2021-1-11

by Mike Holmes

Thanks all for another good discussion today, notes on the main topic of the cluster-aware scheduler are here [1] The next call is tentatively set for a month from now, on February 8th 2021 at 10.00 am GMT*, please bring forward any topics for that call (or any suggestions for a different or earlier call). Mike [1] https://collaborate.linaro.org/display/LOD/2021-1-11+Meeting+Meeting+notes * Note that Chinese New year will start on February 11th 2021 -- Mike Holmes | Director, Foundation Technologies, Linaro Mike.Holmes(a)linaro.org <mike.holmes(a)linaro.org> "Work should be fun and collaborative, the rest follows"

4 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

Linaro-open-discussions