From: Reiji Watanabe <reijiw@google.com>
To: Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@linux.dev>
Cc: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>,
kvmarm@lists.linux.dev, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
Alexandru Elisei <alexandru.elisei@arm.com>,
Zenghui Yu <yuzenghui@huawei.com>,
Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
Jing Zhang <jingzhangos@google.com>,
Raghavendra Rao Anata <rananta@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] KVM: arm64: PMU: Avoid inappropriate use of host's PMUVer
Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2023 09:01:05 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230611160105.orvjohigsaevkcrf@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZIV7+yKUdRticwfF@linux.dev>
Hi Oliver,
Thank you for the clarification!
But, I still have some questions on your comments.
> > > We emulate reads of PMCEID1_EL0 using the literal value of the CPU. The
> > > _advertised_ PMU version has no bearing on the core PMU version. So,
> > > assuming we hit this on a v3p5+ part with userspace (stupidly)
> > > advertising an older implementation level, we never clear the bit for
> > > STALL_SLOT.
> >
> > I'm not sure if I understand this comment correctly.
> > When the guest's PMUVer is older than v3p4, I don't think we need
> > to clear the bit for STALL_SLOT, as PMMIR_EL1 is not implemented
> > for the guest (PMMIR_EL1 is implemented only on v3p4 or newer).
> > Or am I missing something ?
>
> The guest's PMU version has no influence on the *hardware* value of
> PMCEID1_EL0.
>
> Suppose KVM is running on a v3p5+ implementation, but userspace has set
> ID_AA64DFR0_EL1.PMUVer to v3p0. In this case the read of PMCEID1_EL0 on
> the preceding line would advertise the STALL_SLOT event, and KVM fails
> to mask it due to the ID register value. The fact we do not support the
> event is an invariant, in the worst case we wind up clearing a bit
> that's already 0.
As far as I checked ArmARM, the STALL_SLOT event can be supported on
any PMUv3 version (including on v3p0). Assuming that is true, I don't
see any reason to not expose the event to the guest in this particular
example. Or can the STALL_SLOT event only be implemented from certain
versions of PMUv3 ?
> This is why I'd suggested just unconditionally clearing the bit. While
When the hardware supports the STALL_SLOT event (again, I assume any
PMUv3 version hardware can support the event), and the guest's PMUVer
is older than v3p4, what is the reason why we want to clear the bit ?
> we're on the topic, doesn't the same reasoning hold for
> STALL_SLOT_{FRONTEND,BACKEND}? We probably want to hide those too.
Yes, I agree on that.
I will include the fix for that as a part of this series!
Thank you,
Reiji
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-06-11 16:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-06-10 19:45 [PATCH 1/1] KVM: arm64: PMU: Avoid inappropriate use of host's PMUVer Reiji Watanabe
2023-06-11 0:57 ` Oliver Upton
2023-06-11 4:54 ` Reiji Watanabe
2023-06-11 7:47 ` Oliver Upton
2023-06-11 16:01 ` Reiji Watanabe [this message]
2023-06-12 19:36 ` Oliver Upton
2023-06-13 0:26 ` Reiji Watanabe
2023-06-14 12:41 ` Oliver Upton
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=20230611160105.orvjohigsaevkcrf@google.com \
--to=reijiw@google.com \
--cc=alexandru.elisei@arm.com \
--cc=james.morse@arm.com \
--cc=jingzhangos@google.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=kvmarm@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=oliver.upton@linux.dev \
--cc=rananta@google.com \
--cc=suzuki.poulose@arm.com \
--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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox