[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190221115034.GA33673@lakrids.cambridge.arm.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2019 11:50:34 +0000
From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
To: Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.kachhap@....com>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@....com>,
Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
Andrew Jones <drjones@...hat.com>,
Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@....com>,
Ramana Radhakrishnan <ramana.radhakrishnan@....com>,
kvmarm@...ts.cs.columbia.edu,
Kristina Martsenko <kristina.martsenko@....com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, James Morse <james.morse@....com>,
Julien Thierry <julien.thierry@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 1/6] arm64/kvm: preserve host HCR_EL2 value
Hi,
On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 02:54:26PM +0530, Amit Daniel Kachhap wrote:
> From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
>
> When restoring HCR_EL2 for the host, KVM uses HCR_HOST_VHE_FLAGS, which
> is a constant value. This works today, as the host HCR_EL2 value is
> always the same, but this will get in the way of supporting extensions
> that require HCR_EL2 bits to be set conditionally for the host.
>
> To allow such features to work without KVM having to explicitly handle
> every possible host feature combination, this patch has KVM save/restore
> for the host HCR when switching to/from a guest HCR. The saving of the
> register is done once during cpu hypervisor initialization state and is
> just restored after switch from guest.
>
> For fetching HCR_EL2 during kvm initialisation, a hyp call is made using
> kvm_call_hyp and is helpful in NHVE case.
>
> For the hyp TLB maintenance code, __tlb_switch_to_host_vhe() is updated
> to toggle the TGE bit with a RMW sequence, as we already do in
> __tlb_switch_to_guest_vhe().
>
> The value of hcr_el2 is now stored in struct kvm_cpu_context as both host
> and guest can now use this field in a common way.
>
> Signed-off-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
> [Added __cpu_copy_hyp_conf, hcr_el2 field in struct kvm_cpu_context]
> Signed-off-by: Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.kachhap@....com>
> Cc: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>
> Cc: Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@....com>
> Cc: kvmarm@...ts.cs.columbia.edu
[...]
> +/**
> + * __cpu_copy_hyp_conf - copy the boot hyp configuration registers
> + *
> + * It is called once per-cpu during CPU hyp initialisation.
> + */
> +static inline void __cpu_copy_hyp_conf(void)
I think this would be better named as something like:
cpu_init_host_ctxt()
... as that makes it a bit clearer as to what is being initialized.
[...]
> +/**
> + * __kvm_populate_host_regs - Stores host register values
> + *
> + * This function acts as a function handler parameter for kvm_call_hyp and
> + * may be called from EL1 exception level to fetch the register value.
> + */
> +void __hyp_text __kvm_populate_host_regs(void)
> +{
> + struct kvm_cpu_context *host_ctxt;
> +
> + if (has_vhe())
> + host_ctxt = this_cpu_ptr(&kvm_host_cpu_state);
> + else
> + host_ctxt = __hyp_this_cpu_ptr(kvm_host_cpu_state);
Do we need the has_vhe() check here?
Can't we always do:
host_ctxt = __hyp_this_cpu_ptr(kvm_host_cpu_state);
... regardless of VHE? Or is that broken for VHE somehow?
Thanks,
Mark.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists