Re: [PATCH v6 3/5] kvm: arm64: New memslot flag to indicate cacheable mapping

[Ankit Agrawal]

>> I thought we agreed not to do this? Sean was strongly against it
>> right?
>>
>> There is no easy way for VFIO to know to set it, and the kernel will
>> not allow switching a cachable VMA to non-cachable anyhow.
>>
>> So all it does is make it harder to create a memslot.

> Oliver had mentioned earlier that he would still prefer a memslot flag as
> VMM should convey its intent through that flag:
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/aAdKCGCuwlUeUXKY@xxxxxxxxx/
>
> Oliver, could you please confirm if you are convinced with not having this
> flag? Can we rely on MT_NORMAL in vma mapping to convey this?

Humble reminder for Oliver to comment to conclude on whether we really
need this memslot flag.