From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-alma10-1.taild15c8.ts.net [100.103.45.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2FF735CDF1; Tue, 14 Jul 2026 00:30:28 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1783989030; cv=none; b=hQZOF1pjV290pvFUvBol1MVpslWWAcmreHdCsYbKm1RU0s0ufzPzHyirgyPug2nMPYD2TN0isndW/BliiWhI5e+u1xxJRiNOzlB+x2Q5hZxpA+xapbe1cvoZMsnGxaF4hrQEw9jimsJuxi9fJnIpqJwEyC3hv/VMa8zcI/3HElo= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1783989030; c=relaxed/simple; bh=PqPoGVhgrrR8E2OVoBi1CU17djVHEEF/PVTGy3XqHwY=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=b9t5/ICUhdXFMG2yvtJoyQ5Z8WRbWywy8QnOMpzzSGCd+wMz2wd/cYLvSJhZjj3OobfcUq2HcTYMLebHidpQXq3pggGsnJbsm2wY86l/OYd7E7Akt5mljOAKl6PcbMKMsmCDcgHF1hkaoPUXbFG13VAFOHFlm0JDU8k0ROi0zPU= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=XZfpObAH; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="XZfpObAH" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9045A1F000E9; Tue, 14 Jul 2026 00:30:28 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1783989028; bh=HwJZ5fDbgmSR+ahAQmiwhuMgMix6CJj7qh6ixmGfCak=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To; b=XZfpObAHeg8LWfDAIVeaDnwOHoYt6s07qQxfji5bFHlBxmhmIi1GMBms0Ei3w6+HH UsY1hf8lvwjnTyET7dQG2mLbyPs0GSc9BeTORNQmfEDWMNY//0fLRIga60d0lZnGRS qe13vDplIlSV1+gM/FB4GIY+ImjGiz2kFiOEFzDadMCZ7YLeezyGsGJh+DMl6teH4g JnfXTO3ORKkLDFqBv6hnFDT13VRatuMaTj3TusR3Nu/wpQMaU8OlZwbSWuEdTyY+HB 2QbOaJs8+zI0hztq691GAgedgDDhO4ejk48hTqZ/i28LoOYTSXHPbdntgq7vHG27xC 3zZ6+U7pL1rsg== Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2026 17:30:27 -0700 From: Oliver Upton To: Fuad Tabba Cc: Marc Zyngier , kvmarm@lists.linux.dev, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , Joey Gouly , Steffen Eiden , Suzuki K Poulose , Zenghui Yu , Vincent Donnefort , Quentin Perret , Sebastian Ene , Hyunwoo Kim , Fuad Tabba Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/8] KVM: arm64: Make vcpu_{read,write}_sys_reg available to HYP code Message-ID: References: <20260706095927.560795-1-fuad.tabba@linux.dev> <20260706095927.560795-3-fuad.tabba@linux.dev> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20260706095927.560795-3-fuad.tabba@linux.dev> Hi Fuad, On Mon, Jul 06, 2026 at 10:59:21AM +0100, Fuad Tabba wrote: > The vcpu_{read,write}_sys_reg() accessors are host-only, so helpers > built on them such as kvm_vcpu_set_be()/kvm_vcpu_is_be() cannot be > shared with hyp code. exception.c already wraps them in > __vcpu_{read,write}_sys_reg(), which pick the host- or hyp-side accessor > via has_vhe() and so are valid in any context. > > Move those wrappers to kvm_emulate.h as kvm_vcpu_{read,write}_sys_reg() > and switch the callers over, so a follow-up series can share that > emulation code at EL2. > > No functional change intended. > > Reviewed-by: Vincent Donnefort > Signed-off-by: Fuad Tabba > --- > arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_emulate.h | 22 +++++++++++++++--- > arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/exception.c | 34 ++++++++-------------------- > 2 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_emulate.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_emulate.h > index 5bf3d7e1d92c7..80b30fead3d16 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_emulate.h > +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_emulate.h > @@ -506,6 +506,22 @@ static inline unsigned long kvm_vcpu_get_mpidr_aff(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > return __vcpu_sys_reg(vcpu, MPIDR_EL1) & MPIDR_HWID_BITMASK; > } > > +static inline u64 kvm_vcpu_read_sys_reg(const struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, int reg) > +{ > + if (has_vhe()) > + return vcpu_read_sys_reg(vcpu, reg); > + > + return __vcpu_sys_reg(vcpu, reg); > +} > + > +static inline void kvm_vcpu_write_sys_reg(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 val, int reg) > +{ > + if (has_vhe()) > + vcpu_write_sys_reg(vcpu, val, reg); > + else > + __vcpu_assign_sys_reg(vcpu, reg, val); > +} > + Can you instead name the wrappers vcpu_{read,write}_sys_reg() and rename the current implementations, like __vcpu_{read,write}_sysreg_vhe()? Just want to avoid confusion between kvm_vcpu_ and vcpu_ Thanks, Oliver