[PATCH v2 9/9] arm64: KVM: vgic: deal with GIC sub-page alignment

[marc.zyngier@arm.com (Marc Zyngier)]

On 25/06/14 15:56, Joel Schopp wrote:
> 
> On 06/24/2014 05:28 PM, Peter Maydell wrote:
>> On 24 June 2014 20:28, Joel Schopp <joel.schopp@amd.com> wrote:
>>> On 06/19/2014 04:21 AM, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>>>> The GIC CPU interface is always 4k aligned. If the host is using
>>>> 64k pages, it is critical to place the guest's GICC interface at the
>>>> same relative alignment as the host's GICV. Failure to do so results
>>>> in an impossibility for the guest to deal with interrupts.
>>>>
>>>> Add a KVM_DEV_ARM_VGIC_GRP_ADDR_OFFSET attribute for the VGIC, allowing
>>>> userspace to retrieve the GICV offset in a page. It becomes then trivial
>>>> to adjust the GICC base address for the guest.
>>>
>>> Does this mean there is a corresponding patch for qemu?
>> Not as far as I know. It's a bit awkward on the QEMU end because
>> we really want to provide the guest a consistent memory map
>> regardless of the host CPU. So at best we'd probably use it to
>> say "sorry, can't run on this CPU/host kernel".
> I think most arm64 servers are going to run with 64k pages.  It seems 
> like a major problem to have qemu not work on these systems.

How many of them will be with the GICC *not* 64kB aligned?

>>
>> (That said, if you think you can make QEMU usefully use the
>> information and want to write a QEMU patch I'm not averse
>> to the idea.)
> I'll have to think about this approach some more, but I'm not opposed to 
> doing the work if I thought it was the right thing to do.
> 
>>
>> kvmtool is probably better placed to take advantage of it since
>> it takes more of a "deal with what the host provides you"
>> philosophy.
> kvmtool is fun as a play toy, but in the real world nobody is building 
> clouds using kvmtool, they use kvm with qemu.

A play toy? Hmmm. Do you realise that most of KVM on arm64 has been
written using this play toy?

	M.
-- 
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...