From: Vincent Donnefort <vdonnefort@google.com>
To: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
kvmarm@lists.linux.dev, kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: arm64: pkvm: Fixup boot mode to reflect that the kernel resumes from EL1
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2022 14:33:38 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Y0gTshQFSTwh+Eqf@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87pmeygjrl.wl-maz@kernel.org>
On Tue, Oct 11, 2022 at 09:58:22PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Oct 2022 19:48:39 +0100,
> Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@linux.dev> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Oct 11, 2022 at 05:54:00PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> > > The kernel has an awfully complicated boot sequence in order to cope
> > > with the various EL2 configurations, including those that "enhanced"
> > > the architecture. We go from EL2 to EL1, then back to EL2, staying
> > > at EL2 if VHE capable and otherwise go back to EL1.
> > >
> > > Here's a paracetamol tablet for you.
> >
> > Heh, still have a bit of a headache from this :)
> >
> > I'm having a hard time following where we skip the EL2 promotion based
> > on __boot_cpu_mode.
> >
> > On the cpu_resume() path it looks like we take the return of
> > init_kernel_el() and pass that along to finalise_el2(). As we are in EL1
> > at this point, it seems like we'd go init_kernel_el() -> init_el1().
> >
> > What am I missing?
>
> That I'm an idiot.
>
> This is only necessary on pre-6.0, before 005e12676af0 ("arm64: head:
> record CPU boot mode after enabling the MMU"), as this code-path
> *used* to reload the boot mode from memory. Now, this is directly
> passed as a parameter, making this patch useless.
On a 5.10 though, the suprious HVCs are gone and I have not observed any
regression.
Thanks!
For a stable fix:
Tested-by: Vincent Donnefort <vdonnefort@google.com>
>
> The joys of looking at too many code bases at the same time... I'll
> see how we can add it to 5.19.
>
> 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: Vincent Donnefort <vdonnefort@google.com>
To: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
Cc: Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@linux.dev>,
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, kvmarm@lists.linux.dev,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
Alexandru Elisei <alexandru.elisei@arm.com>,
Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: arm64: pkvm: Fixup boot mode to reflect that the kernel resumes from EL1
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2022 14:33:38 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Y0gTshQFSTwh+Eqf@google.com> (raw)
Message-ID: <20221013133338.cubPqxsltFmSoC3j7ll5YeDSXVW9uXxhxXTyoyYxWOQ@z> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87pmeygjrl.wl-maz@kernel.org>
On Tue, Oct 11, 2022 at 09:58:22PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Oct 2022 19:48:39 +0100,
> Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@linux.dev> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Oct 11, 2022 at 05:54:00PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> > > The kernel has an awfully complicated boot sequence in order to cope
> > > with the various EL2 configurations, including those that "enhanced"
> > > the architecture. We go from EL2 to EL1, then back to EL2, staying
> > > at EL2 if VHE capable and otherwise go back to EL1.
> > >
> > > Here's a paracetamol tablet for you.
> >
> > Heh, still have a bit of a headache from this :)
> >
> > I'm having a hard time following where we skip the EL2 promotion based
> > on __boot_cpu_mode.
> >
> > On the cpu_resume() path it looks like we take the return of
> > init_kernel_el() and pass that along to finalise_el2(). As we are in EL1
> > at this point, it seems like we'd go init_kernel_el() -> init_el1().
> >
> > What am I missing?
>
> That I'm an idiot.
>
> This is only necessary on pre-6.0, before 005e12676af0 ("arm64: head:
> record CPU boot mode after enabling the MMU"), as this code-path
> *used* to reload the boot mode from memory. Now, this is directly
> passed as a parameter, making this patch useless.
On a 5.10 though, the suprious HVCs are gone and I have not observed any
regression.
Thanks!
For a stable fix:
Tested-by: Vincent Donnefort <vdonnefort@google.com>
>
> The joys of looking at too many code bases at the same time... I'll
> see how we can add it to 5.19.
>
> Thanks,
>
> M.
>
> --
> Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Vincent Donnefort <vdonnefort@google.com>
To: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
Cc: Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@linux.dev>,
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, kvmarm@lists.linux.dev,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
Alexandru Elisei <alexandru.elisei@arm.com>,
Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: arm64: pkvm: Fixup boot mode to reflect that the kernel resumes from EL1
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2022 14:33:38 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Y0gTshQFSTwh+Eqf@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87pmeygjrl.wl-maz@kernel.org>
On Tue, Oct 11, 2022 at 09:58:22PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Oct 2022 19:48:39 +0100,
> Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@linux.dev> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Oct 11, 2022 at 05:54:00PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> > > The kernel has an awfully complicated boot sequence in order to cope
> > > with the various EL2 configurations, including those that "enhanced"
> > > the architecture. We go from EL2 to EL1, then back to EL2, staying
> > > at EL2 if VHE capable and otherwise go back to EL1.
> > >
> > > Here's a paracetamol tablet for you.
> >
> > Heh, still have a bit of a headache from this :)
> >
> > I'm having a hard time following where we skip the EL2 promotion based
> > on __boot_cpu_mode.
> >
> > On the cpu_resume() path it looks like we take the return of
> > init_kernel_el() and pass that along to finalise_el2(). As we are in EL1
> > at this point, it seems like we'd go init_kernel_el() -> init_el1().
> >
> > What am I missing?
>
> That I'm an idiot.
>
> This is only necessary on pre-6.0, before 005e12676af0 ("arm64: head:
> record CPU boot mode after enabling the MMU"), as this code-path
> *used* to reload the boot mode from memory. Now, this is directly
> passed as a parameter, making this patch useless.
On a 5.10 though, the suprious HVCs are gone and I have not observed any
regression.
Thanks!
For a stable fix:
Tested-by: Vincent Donnefort <vdonnefort@google.com>
>
> The joys of looking at too many code bases at the same time... I'll
> see how we can add it to 5.19.
>
> 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
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-10-13 13:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-10-11 16:54 [PATCH] KVM: arm64: pkvm: Fixup boot mode to reflect that the kernel resumes from EL1 Marc Zyngier
2022-10-11 16:54 ` Marc Zyngier
2022-10-11 16:54 ` Marc Zyngier
2022-10-11 18:48 ` Oliver Upton
2022-10-11 18:48 ` Oliver Upton
2022-10-11 18:48 ` Oliver Upton
2022-10-11 20:58 ` Marc Zyngier
2022-10-11 20:58 ` Marc Zyngier
2022-10-11 20:58 ` Marc Zyngier
2022-10-13 13:33 ` Vincent Donnefort [this message]
2022-10-13 13:33 ` Vincent Donnefort
2022-10-13 13:33 ` Vincent Donnefort
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2022-11-08 10:01 Vincent Donnefort
2022-11-28 16:21 ` Vincent Donnefort
2022-11-28 17:19 ` Greg KH
2022-11-28 17:24 ` Vincent Donnefort
2022-11-28 18:01 ` Greg KH
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=Y0gTshQFSTwh+Eqf@google.com \
--to=vdonnefort@google.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu \
--cc=kvmarm@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=maz@kernel.org \
--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.