All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
To: Oliver Upton <oupton@google.com>
Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	Peter Shier <pshier@google.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org,
	Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
	kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] selftests: KVM: aarch64: Let hypercalls use UAPI *_BIT_COUNT
Date: Thu, 05 May 2022 13:04:07 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87zgjw6v9k.wl-maz@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YnLa8uH55/epyjlS@google.com>

On Wed, 04 May 2022 20:58:42 +0100,
Oliver Upton <oupton@google.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi Raghavendra,
> 
> On Wed, May 04, 2022 at 06:44:15PM +0000, Raghavendra Rao Ananta wrote:
> > The hypercalls test currently defines its own *_BMAP_BIT_MAX macros to
> > define the last valid feature bit for each bitmap firmware register.
> > However, since these definitions are already present in the uapi header,
> > kvm.h, as *_BMAP_BIT_COUNT, and would help to keep the test updated as
> > features grow, use these instead.
> 
> LOL, looks like I lost that one in the end! Still, the fact that you're
> patching the selftest highlights the fact that there is a nonzero chance
> of userspace using this value incorrectly expecting it to hold true
> across all kernels.
> 
> Since this is the route going forward can we please consider documenting
> the fact that _BIT_COUNT *will* change and is not stable between kernel
> versions. Bad UAPI expectations could throw a wrench into this entire
> plan we've hatched for preserving hypercall ABI.
> 
> Just a warning at the end of the register documentation would suffice.

Maybe something in the kvm.h file as well, as the includes are often
distributed without the kernel documentation. Something like:

diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h b/arch/arm64/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h
index e523bb6eac67..3cde9f958eee 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h
+++ b/arch/arm64/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h
@@ -342,6 +342,10 @@ struct kvm_arm_copy_mte_tags {
 
 enum {
 	KVM_REG_ARM_STD_BIT_TRNG_V1_0	= 0,
+	/*
+	 * KVM_REG_ARM_STD_BMAP_BIT_COUNT will vary as new services
+	 * are added, and is explicitely not part of the ABI.
+	 */
 	KVM_REG_ARM_STD_BMAP_BIT_COUNT,
 };
 
@@ -349,6 +353,10 @@ enum {
 
 enum {
 	KVM_REG_ARM_STD_HYP_BIT_PV_TIME	= 0,
+	/*
+	 * KVM_REG_ARM_STD_HYP_BMAP_BIT_COUNT will vary as new
+	 * services are added, and is explicitely not part of the ABI.
+	 */
 	KVM_REG_ARM_STD_HYP_BMAP_BIT_COUNT,
 };
 
@@ -357,6 +365,10 @@ enum {
 enum {
 	KVM_REG_ARM_VENDOR_HYP_BIT_FUNC_FEAT	= 0,
 	KVM_REG_ARM_VENDOR_HYP_BIT_PTP		= 1,
+	/*
+	 * KVM_REG_ARM_VENDOR_HYP_BMAP_BIT_COUNT will vary as new
+	 * services are added, and is explicitely not part of the ABI.
+	 */
 	KVM_REG_ARM_VENDOR_HYP_BMAP_BIT_COUNT,
 };

Thanks,

	M.

-- 
Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.
_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
To: Oliver Upton <oupton@google.com>
Cc: Raghavendra Rao Ananta <rananta@google.com>,
	Andrew Jones <drjones@redhat.com>,
	James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
	Alexandru Elisei <alexandru.elisei@arm.com>,
	Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
	Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, Peter Shier <pshier@google.com>,
	Ricardo Koller <ricarkol@google.com>,
	Reiji Watanabe <reijiw@google.com>,
	Jing Zhang <jingzhangos@google.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] selftests: KVM: aarch64: Let hypercalls use UAPI *_BIT_COUNT
Date: Thu, 05 May 2022 13:04:07 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87zgjw6v9k.wl-maz@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YnLa8uH55/epyjlS@google.com>

On Wed, 04 May 2022 20:58:42 +0100,
Oliver Upton <oupton@google.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi Raghavendra,
> 
> On Wed, May 04, 2022 at 06:44:15PM +0000, Raghavendra Rao Ananta wrote:
> > The hypercalls test currently defines its own *_BMAP_BIT_MAX macros to
> > define the last valid feature bit for each bitmap firmware register.
> > However, since these definitions are already present in the uapi header,
> > kvm.h, as *_BMAP_BIT_COUNT, and would help to keep the test updated as
> > features grow, use these instead.
> 
> LOL, looks like I lost that one in the end! Still, the fact that you're
> patching the selftest highlights the fact that there is a nonzero chance
> of userspace using this value incorrectly expecting it to hold true
> across all kernels.
> 
> Since this is the route going forward can we please consider documenting
> the fact that _BIT_COUNT *will* change and is not stable between kernel
> versions. Bad UAPI expectations could throw a wrench into this entire
> plan we've hatched for preserving hypercall ABI.
> 
> Just a warning at the end of the register documentation would suffice.

Maybe something in the kvm.h file as well, as the includes are often
distributed without the kernel documentation. Something like:

diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h b/arch/arm64/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h
index e523bb6eac67..3cde9f958eee 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h
+++ b/arch/arm64/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h
@@ -342,6 +342,10 @@ struct kvm_arm_copy_mte_tags {
 
 enum {
 	KVM_REG_ARM_STD_BIT_TRNG_V1_0	= 0,
+	/*
+	 * KVM_REG_ARM_STD_BMAP_BIT_COUNT will vary as new services
+	 * are added, and is explicitely not part of the ABI.
+	 */
 	KVM_REG_ARM_STD_BMAP_BIT_COUNT,
 };
 
@@ -349,6 +353,10 @@ enum {
 
 enum {
 	KVM_REG_ARM_STD_HYP_BIT_PV_TIME	= 0,
+	/*
+	 * KVM_REG_ARM_STD_HYP_BMAP_BIT_COUNT will vary as new
+	 * services are added, and is explicitely not part of the ABI.
+	 */
 	KVM_REG_ARM_STD_HYP_BMAP_BIT_COUNT,
 };
 
@@ -357,6 +365,10 @@ enum {
 enum {
 	KVM_REG_ARM_VENDOR_HYP_BIT_FUNC_FEAT	= 0,
 	KVM_REG_ARM_VENDOR_HYP_BIT_PTP		= 1,
+	/*
+	 * KVM_REG_ARM_VENDOR_HYP_BMAP_BIT_COUNT will vary as new
+	 * services are added, and is explicitely not part of the ABI.
+	 */
 	KVM_REG_ARM_VENDOR_HYP_BMAP_BIT_COUNT,
 };

Thanks,

	M.

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

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
To: Oliver Upton <oupton@google.com>
Cc: Raghavendra Rao Ananta <rananta@google.com>,
	Andrew Jones <drjones@redhat.com>,
	James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
	Alexandru Elisei <alexandru.elisei@arm.com>,
	Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
	Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, Peter Shier <pshier@google.com>,
	Ricardo Koller <ricarkol@google.com>,
	Reiji Watanabe <reijiw@google.com>,
	Jing Zhang <jingzhangos@google.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] selftests: KVM: aarch64: Let hypercalls use UAPI *_BIT_COUNT
Date: Thu, 05 May 2022 13:04:07 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87zgjw6v9k.wl-maz@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YnLa8uH55/epyjlS@google.com>

On Wed, 04 May 2022 20:58:42 +0100,
Oliver Upton <oupton@google.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi Raghavendra,
> 
> On Wed, May 04, 2022 at 06:44:15PM +0000, Raghavendra Rao Ananta wrote:
> > The hypercalls test currently defines its own *_BMAP_BIT_MAX macros to
> > define the last valid feature bit for each bitmap firmware register.
> > However, since these definitions are already present in the uapi header,
> > kvm.h, as *_BMAP_BIT_COUNT, and would help to keep the test updated as
> > features grow, use these instead.
> 
> LOL, looks like I lost that one in the end! Still, the fact that you're
> patching the selftest highlights the fact that there is a nonzero chance
> of userspace using this value incorrectly expecting it to hold true
> across all kernels.
> 
> Since this is the route going forward can we please consider documenting
> the fact that _BIT_COUNT *will* change and is not stable between kernel
> versions. Bad UAPI expectations could throw a wrench into this entire
> plan we've hatched for preserving hypercall ABI.
> 
> Just a warning at the end of the register documentation would suffice.

Maybe something in the kvm.h file as well, as the includes are often
distributed without the kernel documentation. Something like:

diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h b/arch/arm64/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h
index e523bb6eac67..3cde9f958eee 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h
+++ b/arch/arm64/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h
@@ -342,6 +342,10 @@ struct kvm_arm_copy_mte_tags {
 
 enum {
 	KVM_REG_ARM_STD_BIT_TRNG_V1_0	= 0,
+	/*
+	 * KVM_REG_ARM_STD_BMAP_BIT_COUNT will vary as new services
+	 * are added, and is explicitely not part of the ABI.
+	 */
 	KVM_REG_ARM_STD_BMAP_BIT_COUNT,
 };
 
@@ -349,6 +353,10 @@ enum {
 
 enum {
 	KVM_REG_ARM_STD_HYP_BIT_PV_TIME	= 0,
+	/*
+	 * KVM_REG_ARM_STD_HYP_BMAP_BIT_COUNT will vary as new
+	 * services are added, and is explicitely not part of the ABI.
+	 */
 	KVM_REG_ARM_STD_HYP_BMAP_BIT_COUNT,
 };
 
@@ -357,6 +365,10 @@ enum {
 enum {
 	KVM_REG_ARM_VENDOR_HYP_BIT_FUNC_FEAT	= 0,
 	KVM_REG_ARM_VENDOR_HYP_BIT_PTP		= 1,
+	/*
+	 * KVM_REG_ARM_VENDOR_HYP_BMAP_BIT_COUNT will vary as new
+	 * services are added, and is explicitely not part of the ABI.
+	 */
 	KVM_REG_ARM_VENDOR_HYP_BMAP_BIT_COUNT,
 };

Thanks,

	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

  reply	other threads:[~2022-05-05 12:04 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-05-04 18:44 [PATCH] selftests: KVM: aarch64: Let hypercalls use UAPI *_BIT_COUNT Raghavendra Rao Ananta
2022-05-04 18:44 ` Raghavendra Rao Ananta
2022-05-04 18:44 ` Raghavendra Rao Ananta
2022-05-04 19:58 ` Oliver Upton
2022-05-04 19:58   ` Oliver Upton
2022-05-04 19:58   ` Oliver Upton
2022-05-05 12:04   ` Marc Zyngier [this message]
2022-05-05 12:04     ` Marc Zyngier
2022-05-05 12:04     ` Marc Zyngier
2022-05-05 13:32     ` Paolo Bonzini
2022-05-05 13:32       ` Paolo Bonzini
2022-05-05 13:32       ` Paolo Bonzini
2022-05-15 10:40       ` Marc Zyngier
2022-05-15 10:40         ` Marc Zyngier
2022-05-15 10:40         ` Marc Zyngier

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=87zgjw6v9k.wl-maz@kernel.org \
    --to=maz@kernel.org \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=oupton@google.com \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    --cc=pshier@google.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.