[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <2de10efc-56f8-ff47-ed69-7e471a099c80@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2019 12:16:57 +0200
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
To: Anup Patel <Anup.Patel@....com>,
Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...ive.com>,
Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
Radim K <rkrcmar@...hat.com>
Cc: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Atish Patra <Atish.Patra@....com>,
Alistair Francis <Alistair.Francis@....com>,
Damien Le Moal <Damien.LeMoal@....com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Anup Patel <anup@...infault.org>,
"kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 04/16] RISC-V: KVM: Implement VCPU create, init and
destroy functions
On 30/07/19 10:48, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 29/07/19 13:56, Anup Patel wrote:
>> + cntx->hstatus |= HSTATUS_SP2V;
>> + cntx->hstatus |= HSTATUS_SP2P;
> IIUC, cntx->hstatus's SP2P bit contains the guest's sstatus.SPP bit?
Nevermind, that was also a bit confused. The guest's sstatus.SPP is in
vsstatus. The pseudocode for V-mode switch is
SRET:
V = hstatus.SPV (1)
MODE = sstatus.SPP
hstatus.SPV = hstatus.SP2V
sstatus.SPP = hstatus.SP2P
hstatus.SP2V = 0
hstatus.SP2P = 0
...
trap:
hstatus.SP2V = hstatus.SPV
hstatus.SP2P = sstatus.SPP
hstatus.SPV = V (1)
sstatus.SPP = MODE
V = 0
MODE = 1
so:
1) indeed we need SP2V=SPV=1 when entering guest mode
2) sstatus.SPP contains the guest mode
3) SP2P doesn't really matter for KVM since it never goes to VS-mode
from an interrupt handler, so if my reasoning is correct I'd leave it
clear, but I guess it's up to you whether to set it or not.
Paolo
> I suggest adding a comment here, and again providing a ONE_REG interface
> to sstatus so that the ABI is final before RISC-V KVM is merged.
>
> What happens if the guest executes SRET? Is that EXC_SYSCALL in hedeleg?
>
> (BTW the name of SP2V and SP2P is horrible, I think HPV/HPP or HSPV/HSPP
> would have been clearer, but that's not your fault).
Powered by blists - more mailing lists