From: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
To: Colton Lewis <coltonlewis@google.com>
Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@linux.dev>,
Joey Gouly <joey.gouly@arm.com>,
Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
Zenghui Yu <yuzenghui@huawei.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvmarm@lists.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] KVM: arm64: Remove cyclical dependency in arm_pmuv3.h
Date: Thu, 06 Feb 2025 08:27:08 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87frkrtr4z.wl-maz@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250206001744.3155465-1-coltonlewis@google.com>
Colton,
On Thu, 06 Feb 2025 00:17:44 +0000,
Colton Lewis <coltonlewis@google.com> wrote:
>
> asm/kvm_host.h includes asm/arm_pmu.h which includes perf/arm_pmuv3.h
> which includes asm/arm_pmuv3.h which includes asm/kvm_host.h This
> causes confusing compilation problems why trying to use anything
> defined in any of the headers in any other headers. Header guards is
> the only reason this cycle didn't create tons of redefinition
> warnings.
>
> The motivating example was figuring out it was impossible to use the
> hypercall macros kvm_call_hyp* from kvm_host.h in arm_pmuv3.h. The
> compiler will insist they aren't defined even though kvm_host.h is
> included. Many other examples are lurking which could confuse
> developers in the future.
Well, that's because contrary to what you have asserted in v1, not all
include files are legitimate to use willy-nilly. You have no business
directly using asm/kvm_host.h, and linux/kvm_host.h is what you need.
>
> Break the cycle by taking asm/kvm_host.h out of asm/arm_pmuv3.h
> because asm/kvm_host.h is huge and we only need a few functions from
> it. Move the required declarations to a new header asm/kvm_pmu.h.
>
> Signed-off-by: Colton Lewis <coltonlewis@google.com>
> ---
>
> Possibly spinning more definitions out of asm/kvm_host.h would be a
> good idea, but I'm not interested in getting bogged down in which
> functions ideally belong where. This is sufficient to break the
Tough luck. I'm not interested in half baked solutions, and "what
belongs where" *is* the problem that needs solving.
> cyclical dependency and get rid of the compilation issues. Though I
> mention the one example I found, many other similar problems could
> confuse developers in the future.
>
> v2:
> * Make a new header instead of moving kvm functions into the
> dedicated pmuv3 header
>
> v1:
> https://lore.kernel.org/kvm/20250204195708.1703531-1-coltonlewis@google.com/
>
> arch/arm64/include/asm/arm_pmuv3.h | 3 +--
> arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h | 14 --------------
> arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_pmu.h | 26 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> include/kvm/arm_pmu.h | 1 -
> 4 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
> create mode 100644 arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_pmu.h
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/arm_pmuv3.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/arm_pmuv3.h
> index 8a777dec8d88..54dd27a7a19f 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/arm_pmuv3.h
> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/arm_pmuv3.h
> @@ -6,9 +6,8 @@
> #ifndef __ASM_PMUV3_H
> #define __ASM_PMUV3_H
>
> -#include <asm/kvm_host.h>
> -
> #include <asm/cpufeature.h>
> +#include <asm/kvm_pmu.h>
> #include <asm/sysreg.h>
>
> #define RETURN_READ_PMEVCNTRN(n) \
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> index 7cfa024de4e3..6d4a2e7ab310 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> @@ -1385,25 +1385,11 @@ void kvm_arch_vcpu_ctxflush_fp(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu);
> void kvm_arch_vcpu_ctxsync_fp(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu);
> void kvm_arch_vcpu_put_fp(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu);
>
> -static inline bool kvm_pmu_counter_deferred(struct perf_event_attr *attr)
> -{
> - return (!has_vhe() && attr->exclude_host);
> -}
> -
> #ifdef CONFIG_KVM
> -void kvm_set_pmu_events(u64 set, struct perf_event_attr *attr);
> -void kvm_clr_pmu_events(u64 clr);
> -bool kvm_set_pmuserenr(u64 val);
> void kvm_enable_trbe(void);
> void kvm_disable_trbe(void);
> void kvm_tracing_set_el1_configuration(u64 trfcr_while_in_guest);
> #else
> -static inline void kvm_set_pmu_events(u64 set, struct perf_event_attr *attr) {}
> -static inline void kvm_clr_pmu_events(u64 clr) {}
> -static inline bool kvm_set_pmuserenr(u64 val)
> -{
> - return false;
> -}
> static inline void kvm_enable_trbe(void) {}
> static inline void kvm_disable_trbe(void) {}
> static inline void kvm_tracing_set_el1_configuration(u64 trfcr_while_in_guest) {}
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_pmu.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_pmu.h
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000000..3a8f737504d2
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_pmu.h
> @@ -0,0 +1,26 @@
> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only */
> +
> +#ifndef __KVM_PMU_H
> +#define __KVM_PMU_H
> +
> +void kvm_vcpu_pmu_resync_el0(void);
> +
> +#ifdef CONFIG_KVM
> +void kvm_set_pmu_events(u64 set, struct perf_event_attr *attr);
> +void kvm_clr_pmu_events(u64 clr);
> +bool kvm_set_pmuserenr(u64 val);
> +#else
> +static inline void kvm_set_pmu_events(u64 set, struct perf_event_attr *attr) {}
> +static inline void kvm_clr_pmu_events(u64 clr) {}
> +static inline bool kvm_set_pmuserenr(u64 val)
> +{
> + return false;
> +}
> +#endif
> +
> +static inline bool kvm_pmu_counter_deferred(struct perf_event_attr *attr)
> +{
> + return (!has_vhe() && attr->exclude_host);
> +}
> +
> +#endif
How does this solve your problem of using the HYP-calling macros?
> diff --git a/include/kvm/arm_pmu.h b/include/kvm/arm_pmu.h
> index 147bd3ee4f7b..2c78b1b1a9bb 100644
> --- a/include/kvm/arm_pmu.h
> +++ b/include/kvm/arm_pmu.h
> @@ -74,7 +74,6 @@ int kvm_arm_pmu_v3_enable(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu);
> struct kvm_pmu_events *kvm_get_pmu_events(void);
> void kvm_vcpu_pmu_restore_guest(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu);
> void kvm_vcpu_pmu_restore_host(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu);
> -void kvm_vcpu_pmu_resync_el0(void);
>
> #define kvm_vcpu_has_pmu(vcpu) \
> (vcpu_has_feature(vcpu, KVM_ARM_VCPU_PMU_V3))
>
> base-commit: 2014c95afecee3e76ca4a56956a936e23283f05b
I'm absolutely not keen on *two* PMU-related include files. They both
describe internal APIs, and don't see a good reasoning for this
arbitrary split other than "it works better for me and I don't want to
do more than strictly necessary".
For example, include/kvm was only introduced to be able to share files
between architectures, and with 32bit KVM/arm being long dead, this
serves no purpose anymore. Moving these things out of the way would be
a good start and would provide a better base for further change.
So please present a rationale on what needs to go where and why based
on their usage pattern rather than personal convenience, and then
we'll look at a possible patch. But not the other way around.
Thanks,
M.
--
Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-02-06 8:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-02-06 0:17 [PATCH v2] KVM: arm64: Remove cyclical dependency in arm_pmuv3.h Colton Lewis
2025-02-06 8:27 ` Marc Zyngier [this message]
2025-02-06 19:45 ` Colton Lewis
2025-02-07 11:52 ` Marc Zyngier
2025-02-07 17:40 ` Colton Lewis
2025-02-06 23:27 ` kernel test robot
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=87frkrtr4z.wl-maz@kernel.org \
--to=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=coltonlewis@google.com \
--cc=joey.gouly@arm.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=kvmarm@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=oliver.upton@linux.dev \
--cc=suzuki.poulose@arm.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
--cc=yuzenghui@huawei.com \
/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.