[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20221116170335.2341003-11-qperret@google.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2022 17:03:33 +0000
From: Quentin Perret <qperret@...gle.com>
To: Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>, James Morse <james.morse@....com>,
Alexandru Elisei <alexandru.elisei@....com>,
Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@....com>,
Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@...ux.dev>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>,
Andrew Walbran <qwandor@...gle.com>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, kvmarm@...ts.linux.dev,
kvmarm@...ts.cs.columbia.edu, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
kernel-team@...roid.com, qperret@...gle.com
Subject: [PATCH 10/12] KVM: arm64: Handle FFA_MEM_RECLAIM calls from the host
From: Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
Intecept FFA_MEM_RECLAIM calls from the host and transition the host
stage-2 page-table entries from the SHARED_OWNED state back to the OWNED
state once EL3 has confirmed that the secure mapping has been reclaimed.
Signed-off-by: Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
Signed-off-by: Quentin Perret <qperret@...gle.com>
---
arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/nvhe/ffa.c | 80 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
1 file changed, 79 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/nvhe/ffa.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/nvhe/ffa.c
index e6d85849c617..8f690b80af60 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/nvhe/ffa.c
+++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/nvhe/ffa.c
@@ -130,6 +130,23 @@ static void spmd_mem_share(struct arm_smccc_res *res, u32 len, u32 fraglen)
res);
}
+static void spmd_mem_reclaim(struct arm_smccc_res *res, u32 handle_lo,
+ u32 handle_hi, u32 flags)
+{
+ arm_smccc_1_1_smc(FFA_MEM_RECLAIM,
+ handle_lo, handle_hi, flags,
+ 0, 0, 0, 0,
+ res);
+}
+
+static void spmd_retrieve_req(struct arm_smccc_res *res, u32 len)
+{
+ arm_smccc_1_1_smc(FFA_FN64_MEM_RETRIEVE_REQ,
+ len, len,
+ 0, 0, 0, 0, 0,
+ res);
+}
+
static void do_ffa_rxtx_map(struct arm_smccc_res *res,
struct kvm_cpu_context *ctxt)
{
@@ -381,6 +398,65 @@ static void do_ffa_mem_share(struct arm_smccc_res *res,
return;
}
+static void do_ffa_mem_reclaim(struct arm_smccc_res *res,
+ struct kvm_cpu_context *ctxt)
+{
+ DECLARE_REG(u32, handle_lo, ctxt, 1);
+ DECLARE_REG(u32, handle_hi, ctxt, 2);
+ DECLARE_REG(u32, flags, ctxt, 3);
+ struct ffa_composite_mem_region *reg;
+ struct ffa_mem_region *buf;
+ int ret = 0;
+ u32 offset;
+ u64 handle;
+
+ handle = PACK_HANDLE(handle_lo, handle_hi);
+
+ hyp_spin_lock(&host_buffers.lock);
+
+ buf = hyp_buffers.tx;
+ *buf = (struct ffa_mem_region) {
+ .sender_id = HOST_FFA_ID,
+ .handle = handle,
+ };
+
+ spmd_retrieve_req(res, sizeof(*buf));
+ buf = hyp_buffers.rx;
+ if (res->a0 != FFA_MEM_RETRIEVE_RESP)
+ goto out_unlock;
+
+ /* Check for fragmentation */
+ if (res->a1 != res->a2) {
+ ret = FFA_RET_ABORTED;
+ goto out_unlock;
+ }
+
+ offset = buf->ep_mem_access[0].composite_off;
+ /*
+ * We can trust the SPMD to get this right, but let's at least
+ * check that we end up with something that doesn't look _completely_
+ * bogus.
+ */
+ if (WARN_ON(offset > KVM_FFA_MBOX_NR_PAGES * PAGE_SIZE)) {
+ ret = FFA_RET_ABORTED;
+ goto out_unlock;
+ }
+
+ reg = (void *)buf + offset;
+ spmd_mem_reclaim(res, handle_lo, handle_hi, flags);
+ if (res->a0 != FFA_SUCCESS)
+ goto out_unlock;
+
+ /* If the SPMD was happy, then we should be too. */
+ WARN_ON(ffa_host_unshare_ranges(reg->constituents,
+ reg->addr_range_cnt));
+out_unlock:
+ hyp_spin_unlock(&host_buffers.lock);
+
+ if (ret)
+ ffa_to_smccc_res(res, ret);
+}
+
static bool ffa_call_unsupported(u64 func_id)
{
switch (func_id) {
@@ -461,9 +537,11 @@ bool kvm_host_ffa_handler(struct kvm_cpu_context *host_ctxt)
case FFA_FN64_MEM_SHARE:
do_ffa_mem_share(&res, host_ctxt);
goto out_handled;
+ case FFA_MEM_RECLAIM:
+ do_ffa_mem_reclaim(&res, host_ctxt);
+ goto out_handled;
case FFA_MEM_LEND:
case FFA_FN64_MEM_LEND:
- case FFA_MEM_RECLAIM:
case FFA_MEM_FRAG_TX:
break;
}
--
2.38.1.431.g37b22c650d-goog
Powered by blists - more mailing lists