From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 329F51AC452; Wed, 11 Sep 2024 15:38:47 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1726069128; cv=none; b=JGYXwBasphCisX/2KWsmrgQAJr3IZyP7A/B2MN0xqXUnUu7h1RZw9b2rSK2trjCJJkqn7oTbkLzklWPpLbiyw7eaFAQ0hxpY4cK6D/lUOkHra7HidvPysjDr+mZUB/JpAo+ikcEg2oEIpRTFp14unM/qkR/KZQP707dhfwwndMc= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1726069128; c=relaxed/simple; bh=QXNbUMRnp7GSpzgS2NMBHKjIaE+3Iot+Pwen86lwgm0=; h=Date:Message-ID:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=l++aRnyVh3taB4fapFNcgKSpQckewNrF0BEsn4gb8IGnTSeEus6ecImi/TczaJXZLu6O5enrTnIT8MNBfGcC86RfOuCQYP4TiA0xB6QtUp4ug7X/RLcMu7qWypkHLy95OlYzGCf5fHsWQeG3j1o0TSLlAZ2yv+E+OFE1RXdzK9k= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=Q2kRUeGq; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="Q2kRUeGq" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B7413C4CEC7; Wed, 11 Sep 2024 15:38:47 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1726069127; bh=QXNbUMRnp7GSpzgS2NMBHKjIaE+3Iot+Pwen86lwgm0=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=Q2kRUeGqilM3z+qHYizbvhdFYxTz61KWW2q9694IOZOkj9LQhGIP5w0VgQI8WISU/ Q95oYFiblD2zkHFGtiwuY6hl+ghy+VgQkeGkXr8sF0it1oM6itF3/qdtlzuAWz/EUu ggHjXMwZtssNrcE/xTvAc6/zBV6LqpnLKGKNTHpjzOBD5x4Yc6E+Z2oYNmGdV2vsew ABovSiAJs0/c0co1y0sj1wJooFZpMz/t8mJDdEMGEPCN9TfBMW8WQV6o69RJBkinIy ta7yjGqMJABR3NdpucKri+WAjHgzrykeTVn5CaQyZ/DYSNe6FzL4vcUcRnRvKUOKyB 4kClu4N4nUvuA== Received: from sofa.misterjones.org ([185.219.108.64] helo=goblin-girl.misterjones.org) by disco-boy.misterjones.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.95) (envelope-from ) id 1soPQb-00CALu-Q9; Wed, 11 Sep 2024 16:38:45 +0100 Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2024 16:38:45 +0100 Message-ID: <86o74u6vzu.wl-maz@kernel.org> From: Marc Zyngier To: Joey Gouly Cc: kvmarm@lists.linux.dev, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, James Morse , Suzuki K Poulose , Oliver Upton , Zenghui Yu , Alexandru Elisei , Mark Brown Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 18/24] KVM: arm64: Split S1 permission evaluation into direct and hierarchical parts In-Reply-To: <20240911141513.GA1080224@e124191.cambridge.arm.com> References: <20240911135151.401193-1-maz@kernel.org> <20240911135151.401193-19-maz@kernel.org> <20240911141513.GA1080224@e124191.cambridge.arm.com> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) SEMI-EPG/1.14.7 (Harue) FLIM-LB/1.14.9 (=?UTF-8?B?R29qxY0=?=) APEL-LB/10.8 EasyPG/1.0.0 Emacs/29.4 (aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu) MULE/6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: kvm@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 185.219.108.64 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: joey.gouly@arm.com, kvmarm@lists.linux.dev, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, james.morse@arm.com, suzuki.poulose@arm.com, oliver.upton@linux.dev, yuzenghui@huawei.com, alexandru.elisei@arm.com, broonie@kernel.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: maz@kernel.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on disco-boy.misterjones.org); SAEximRunCond expanded to false On Wed, 11 Sep 2024 15:15:13 +0100, Joey Gouly wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 11, 2024 at 02:51:45PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote: [...] > > +static void compute_s1_hierarchical_permissions(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, > > + struct s1_walk_info *wi, > > + struct s1_walk_result *wr, > > + struct s1_perms *s1p) > > +{ > > How about: > > if (wi->hpd) > return; I was hoping not to add anything like this, because all the table bits are 0 (we simply don't collect them), and thus don't have any effect. Or did you spot any edge case where that would result in in a different set of permissions? Thanks, M. -- Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.