From: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
Cc: Oliver Upton <oupton@kernel.org>, Joey Gouly <joey.gouly@arm.com>,
Steffen Eiden <seiden@linux.ibm.com>,
Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, kvmarm@lists.linux.dev,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: arm64: Preserve all guest ZCR_EL2.LEN values
Date: Sat, 23 May 2026 16:24:52 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87fr3i9mij.wl-maz@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ahG75BY6yvaePj-B@sirena.org.uk>
On Sat, 23 May 2026 15:38:28 +0100,
Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> On Sat, May 23, 2026 at 09:47:38AM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> > Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> > > Currently all other bits in ZCR_EL2 are either RES0 or RAZ/WI, values
> > > written are sanitised based on this.
>
> > Only for the direct writes to ZCR_EL2, as they are trapping. I don't
> > see any sanitisation for writes using the ZCR_EL1 accessor, which is
> > the common case. This needs fixing at the same time.
>
> OK, I'll convert ZCR_EL2 to a sanitised register. As I mentioned I was
> a bit confused about why the existing code is the way it is and so
> followed it in only managing the direct writes. I figured it was
> considered OK to rely on the hardware for the RES0 and WI behaviour for
> untrapped access.
In general, that's OK. But given that you need sanitisation in the
trapping case, it is way better to have a uniform behaviour and keep
sanitisation at the accessor level. It is also more sustainable in the
long run, should ZCR_ELx get new significant bits.
Thanks,
M.
--
Jazz isn't dead. It just smells funny.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-05-23 15:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-05-22 18:00 [PATCH] KVM: arm64: Preserve all guest ZCR_EL2.LEN values Mark Brown
2026-05-23 8:47 ` Marc Zyngier
2026-05-23 14:38 ` Mark Brown
2026-05-23 15:24 ` Marc Zyngier [this message]
2026-05-25 18:36 ` Mark Rutland
2026-05-26 10:19 ` Mark Brown
2026-05-26 12:03 ` Mark Rutland
2026-05-26 13:03 ` Mark Brown
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87fr3i9mij.wl-maz@kernel.org \
--to=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=joey.gouly@arm.com \
--cc=kvmarm@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=oupton@kernel.org \
--cc=seiden@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=suzuki.poulose@arm.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.