Message-ID: <CAAhSdy08SoDoZCii9R--BK7_NKLnRciW7V3mo2aQRKW1dbOgNg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 4 Sep 2024 20:15:27 +0530
From: Anup Patel <anup@...infault.org>
To: Samuel Holland <samuel.holland@...ive.com>
Cc: Anup Patel <apatel@...tanamicro.com>, Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>, 
	linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org, 
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	Conor Dooley <conor@...nel.org>, kasan-dev@...glegroups.com, 
	Atish Patra <atishp@...shpatra.org>, Evgenii Stepanov <eugenis@...gle.com>, 
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>, Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>, 
	"Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>, kvm-riscv@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 09/10] RISC-V: KVM: Allow Smnpm and Ssnpm extensions
 for guests

On Wed, Sep 4, 2024 at 8:01 PM Samuel Holland <samuel.holland@...ive.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Anup,
>
> On 2024-09-04 7:17 AM, Anup Patel wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 29, 2024 at 6:32 AM Samuel Holland
> > <samuel.holland@...ive.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> The interface for controlling pointer masking in VS-mode is henvcfg.PMM,
> >> which is part of the Ssnpm extension, even though pointer masking in
> >> HS-mode is provided by the Smnpm extension. As a result, emulating Smnpm
> >> in the guest requires (only) Ssnpm on the host.
> >>
> >> Since the guest configures Smnpm through the SBI Firmware Features
> >> interface, the extension can be disabled by failing the SBI call. Ssnpm
> >> cannot be disabled without intercepting writes to the senvcfg CSR.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Samuel Holland <samuel.holland@...ive.com>
> >> ---
> >>
> >> (no changes since v2)
> >>
> >> Changes in v2:
> >>  - New patch for v2
> >>
> >>  arch/riscv/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h | 2 ++
> >>  arch/riscv/kvm/vcpu_onereg.c      | 3 +++
> >>  2 files changed, 5 insertions(+)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/arch/riscv/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h b/arch/riscv/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h
> >> index e97db3296456..4f24201376b1 100644
> >> --- a/arch/riscv/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h
> >> +++ b/arch/riscv/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h
> >> @@ -175,6 +175,8 @@ enum KVM_RISCV_ISA_EXT_ID {
> >>         KVM_RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZCF,
> >>         KVM_RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZCMOP,
> >>         KVM_RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZAWRS,
> >> +       KVM_RISCV_ISA_EXT_SMNPM,
> >> +       KVM_RISCV_ISA_EXT_SSNPM,
> >>         KVM_RISCV_ISA_EXT_MAX,
> >>  };
> >>
> >> diff --git a/arch/riscv/kvm/vcpu_onereg.c b/arch/riscv/kvm/vcpu_onereg.c
> >> index b319c4c13c54..6f833ec2344a 100644
> >> --- a/arch/riscv/kvm/vcpu_onereg.c
> >> +++ b/arch/riscv/kvm/vcpu_onereg.c
> >> @@ -34,9 +34,11 @@ static const unsigned long kvm_isa_ext_arr[] = {
> >>         [KVM_RISCV_ISA_EXT_M] = RISCV_ISA_EXT_m,
> >>         [KVM_RISCV_ISA_EXT_V] = RISCV_ISA_EXT_v,
> >>         /* Multi letter extensions (alphabetically sorted) */
> >> +       [KVM_RISCV_ISA_EXT_SMNPM] = RISCV_ISA_EXT_SSNPM,
> >
> > Why not use KVM_ISA_EXT_ARR() macro here ?
>
> Because the extension name in the host does not match the extension name in the
> guest. Pointer masking for HS mode is provided by Smnpm. Pointer masking for VS
> mode is provided by Ssnpm at the hardware level, but this needs to appear to the
> guest as if Smnpm was implemented, since the guest thinks it is running on bare
> metal.

Okay, makes sense.

>
> >>         KVM_ISA_EXT_ARR(SMSTATEEN),
> >>         KVM_ISA_EXT_ARR(SSAIA),
> >>         KVM_ISA_EXT_ARR(SSCOFPMF),
> >> +       KVM_ISA_EXT_ARR(SSNPM),
> >>         KVM_ISA_EXT_ARR(SSTC),
> >>         KVM_ISA_EXT_ARR(SVINVAL),
> >>         KVM_ISA_EXT_ARR(SVNAPOT),
> >> @@ -129,6 +131,7 @@ static bool kvm_riscv_vcpu_isa_disable_allowed(unsigned long ext)
> >>         case KVM_RISCV_ISA_EXT_M:
> >>         /* There is not architectural config bit to disable sscofpmf completely */
> >>         case KVM_RISCV_ISA_EXT_SSCOFPMF:
> >> +       case KVM_RISCV_ISA_EXT_SSNPM:
> >
> > Why not add KVM_RISCV_ISA_EXT_SMNPM here ?
> >
> > Disabling Smnpm from KVM user space is very different from
> > disabling Smnpm from Guest using SBI FWFT extension.
>
> Until a successful SBI FWFT call to KVM to enable pointer masking for VS mode,
> the existence of Smnpm has no visible effect on the guest. So failing the SBI
> call is sufficient to pretend that the hardware does not support Smnpm.
>
> > The KVM user space should always add Smnpm in the
> > Guest ISA string whenever the Host ISA string has it.
>
> I disagree. Allowing userspace to disable extensions is useful for testing and
> to support migration to hosts which do not support those extensions. So I would
> only add extensions to this list if there is no possible way to disable them.

I am not saying to disallow KVM user space disabling Smnpm.

The presence of Smnpm in ISA only means that it is present in HW
but it needs to be explicitly configured/enabled using SBI FWFT.

KVM user space can certainly disable extensions by not adding it to
ISA string based on the KVMTOOL/QEMU-KVM command line option.
Additionally, when SBI FWFT is added to KVM RISC-V. It will have its
own way to explicitly disable firmware features from KVM user space.

>
> > The Guest must explicitly use SBI FWFT to enable
> > Smnpm only after it sees Smnpm in ISA string.
>
> Yes, exactly, and the purpose of not including Smnpm in the switch case here is
> so that KVM user space can control whether or not it appears in the ISA string.
>
> Regards,
> Samuel
>
> >>         case KVM_RISCV_ISA_EXT_SSTC:
> >>         case KVM_RISCV_ISA_EXT_SVINVAL:
> >>         case KVM_RISCV_ISA_EXT_SVNAPOT:
> >> --
> >> 2.45.1
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> linux-riscv mailing list
> >> linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org
> >> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv
> >
> > Regards,
> > Anup
>

Regards,
Anup

Powered by blists - more mailing lists