Re: [RFC V3 13/13] KVM: arm64: Enable FEAT_LPA2 based 52 bits IPA size on 4K and 16K

[Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>]

On Tue, 12 Oct 2021 05:24:15 +0100,
Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@arm.com> wrote:
> 
> Hello Marc,
> 
> On 10/11/21 3:46 PM, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> > On Thu, 30 Sep 2021 11:35:16 +0100,
> > Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@arm.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Stage-2 FEAT_LPA2 support is independent and also orthogonal to FEAT_LPA2
> >> support either in Stage-1 or in the host kernel. Stage-2 IPA range support
> >> is evaluated from the platform via ID_AA64MMFR0_TGRAN_2_SUPPORTED_LPA2 and
> >> gets enabled regardless of Stage-1 translation.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@arm.com>
> >> ---
> >>  arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_pgtable.h | 10 +++++++++-
> >>  arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/pgtable.c         | 25 +++++++++++++++++++++++--
> >>  arch/arm64/kvm/reset.c               | 14 ++++++++++----
> >>  3 files changed, 42 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_pgtable.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_pgtable.h
> >> index 0277838..78a9d12 100644
> >> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_pgtable.h
> >> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_pgtable.h
> >> @@ -29,18 +29,26 @@ typedef u64 kvm_pte_t;
> >>  
> >>  #define KVM_PTE_ADDR_MASK		GENMASK(47, PAGE_SHIFT)
> >>  #define KVM_PTE_ADDR_51_48		GENMASK(15, 12)
> >> +#define KVM_PTE_ADDR_51_50		GENMASK(9, 8)
> >>  
> >>  static inline bool kvm_pte_valid(kvm_pte_t pte)
> >>  {
> >>  	return pte & KVM_PTE_VALID;
> >>  }
> >>  
> >> +void set_kvm_lpa2_enabled(void);
> >> +bool get_kvm_lpa2_enabled(void);
> >> +
> >>  static inline u64 kvm_pte_to_phys(kvm_pte_t pte)
> >>  {
> >>  	u64 pa = pte & KVM_PTE_ADDR_MASK;
> >>  
> >> -	if (PAGE_SHIFT == 16)
> >> +	if (PAGE_SHIFT == 16) {
> >>  		pa |= FIELD_GET(KVM_PTE_ADDR_51_48, pte) << 48;
> >> +	} else {
> >> +		if (get_kvm_lpa2_enabled())
> > 
> > Having to do a function call just for this test seems bad, specially
> > for something that is used so often on the fault path.
> > 
> > Why can't this be made a normal capability that indicates LPA support
> > for the current page size?
> 
> Although I could look into making this a normal capability check, would
> not a static key based implementation be preferred if the function call
> based construct here is too expensive ?

A capability *is* a static key. Specially if you make it final.

> Originally, avoided capability method for stage-2 because it would have
> been difficult in stage-1 where the FEAT_LPA2 detection is required way
> earlier during boot before cpu capability comes up. Hence just followed
> a simple variable method both for stage-1 and stage-2 keeping it same.

I think you'll have to find a way to make it work with a capability
for S1 too. Capabilities can be used even when not final, and you may
have to do something similar.

> > 
> >> +			pa |= FIELD_GET(KVM_PTE_ADDR_51_50, pte) << 50;
> > 
> > Where are bits 48 and 49?
> 
> Unlike the current FEAT_LPA feature, bits 48 and 49 are part of the PA
> itself. Only the bits 50 and 51 move into bits 8 and 9, while creating
> a PTE.

So why are you actively dropping these bits? Hint: look at
KVM_PTE_ADDR_MASK and the way it is used to extract the initial value
of 'pa'.

[...]

> > Another thing I don't see is how you manage TLB invalidation by level
> > now that we gain a level 0 at 4kB, breaking the current assumptions
> > encoded in __tlbi_level().
> 
> Right, I guess something like this (not build tested) will be required as
> level 0 for 4K and level 1 for 16K would only make sense when FEAT_LPA2 is
> implemented, otherwise it will fallback to the default behaviour i.e table
> level hint was not provided (TTL[3:2] is 0b00). Is there any other concern
> which I might be missing here ?
> 
> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/tlbflush.h
> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/tlbflush.h
> @@ -104,8 +104,7 @@ static inline unsigned long get_trans_granule(void)
>  #define __tlbi_level(op, addr, level) do {                             \
>         u64 arg = addr;                                                 \
>                                                                         \
> -       if (cpus_have_const_cap(ARM64_HAS_ARMv8_4_TTL) &&               \
> -           level) {                                                    \
> +       if (cpus_have_const_cap(ARM64_HAS_ARMv8_4_TTL) {                \
>                 u64 ttl = level & 3;                                    \
>                 ttl |= get_trans_granule() << 2;                        \
>                 arg &= ~TLBI_TTL_MASK;                                  \
> 

That's a start, but 0 has always meant 'at any level' until now. You
will have to audit all the call sites and work out whether they can
pass 0 if they don't track the actual level.

	M.

-- 
Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel