From: Shameerali Kolothum Thodi <shameerali.kolothum.thodi@huawei.com>
To: Jing Zhang <jingzhangos@google.com>, KVM <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
KVMARM <kvmarm@lists.linux.dev>,
ARMLinux <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>, Oliver Upton <oupton@google.com>
Cc: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
"James Morse" <james.morse@arm.com>,
Alexandru Elisei <alexandru.elisei@arm.com>,
Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
Fuad Tabba <tabba@google.com>, Reiji Watanabe <reijiw@google.com>,
Raghavendra Rao Ananta <rananta@google.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v9 1/5] KVM: arm64: Save ID registers' sanitized value per guest
Date: Thu, 18 May 2023 07:17:48 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2e727b02fe9141098ed474ef49ddc495@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230517061015.1915934-2-jingzhangos@google.com>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jing Zhang [mailto:jingzhangos@google.com]
> Sent: 17 May 2023 07:10
> To: KVM <kvm@vger.kernel.org>; KVMARM <kvmarm@lists.linux.dev>;
> ARMLinux <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>; Marc Zyngier
> <maz@kernel.org>; Oliver Upton <oupton@google.com>
> Cc: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>; Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>;
> James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>; Alexandru Elisei
> <alexandru.elisei@arm.com>; Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>;
> Fuad Tabba <tabba@google.com>; Reiji Watanabe <reijiw@google.com>;
> Raghavendra Rao Ananta <rananta@google.com>; Jing Zhang
> <jingzhangos@google.com>
> Subject: [PATCH v9 1/5] KVM: arm64: Save ID registers' sanitized value per
> guest
>
> Introduce id_regs[] in kvm_arch as a storage of guest's ID registers,
> and save ID registers' sanitized value in the array at KVM_CREATE_VM.
> Use the saved ones when ID registers are read by the guest or
> userspace (via KVM_GET_ONE_REG).
>
> No functional change intended.
>
> Co-developed-by: Reiji Watanabe <reijiw@google.com>
> Signed-off-by: Reiji Watanabe <reijiw@google.com>
> Signed-off-by: Jing Zhang <jingzhangos@google.com>
> ---
> arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h | 20 +++++++++
> arch/arm64/kvm/arm.c | 1 +
> arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c | 69
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++------
> arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.h | 7 ++++
> 4 files changed, 85 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> index 7e7e19ef6993..949a4a782844 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> @@ -178,6 +178,21 @@ struct kvm_smccc_features {
> unsigned long vendor_hyp_bmap;
> };
>
> +/*
> + * Emulated CPU ID registers per VM
> + * (Op0, Op1, CRn, CRm, Op2) of the ID registers to be saved in it
> + * is (3, 0, 0, crm, op2), where 1<=crm<8, 0<=op2<8.
> + *
> + * These emulated idregs are VM-wide, but accessed from the context of a
> vCPU.
> + * Access to id regs are guarded by kvm_arch.config_lock.
> + */
> +#define KVM_ARM_ID_REG_NUM 56
> +#define IDREG_IDX(id) (((sys_reg_CRm(id) - 1) << 3) | sys_reg_Op2(id))
> +#define IDREG(kvm, id) ((kvm)->arch.idregs.regs[IDREG_IDX(id)])
> +struct kvm_idregs {
> + u64 regs[KVM_ARM_ID_REG_NUM];
> +};
>
Not sure we really need this struct here. Why can't this array be moved to
struct kvm_arch directly?
> typedef unsigned int pkvm_handle_t;
>
> struct kvm_protected_vm {
> @@ -253,6 +268,9 @@ struct kvm_arch {
> struct kvm_smccc_features smccc_feat;
> struct maple_tree smccc_filter;
>
> + /* Emulated CPU ID registers */
> + struct kvm_idregs idregs;
> +
> /*
> * For an untrusted host VM, 'pkvm.handle' is used to lookup
> * the associated pKVM instance in the hypervisor.
> @@ -1045,6 +1063,8 @@ int kvm_vm_ioctl_mte_copy_tags(struct kvm
> *kvm,
> int kvm_vm_ioctl_set_counter_offset(struct kvm *kvm,
> struct kvm_arm_counter_offset *offset);
>
> +void kvm_arm_init_id_regs(struct kvm *kvm);
> +
> /* Guest/host FPSIMD coordination helpers */
> int kvm_arch_vcpu_run_map_fp(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu);
> void kvm_arch_vcpu_load_fp(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu);
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/arm.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/arm.c
> index 14391826241c..774656a0718d 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/arm.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/arm.c
> @@ -163,6 +163,7 @@ int kvm_arch_init_vm(struct kvm *kvm, unsigned
> long type)
>
> set_default_spectre(kvm);
> kvm_arm_init_hypercalls(kvm);
> + kvm_arm_init_id_regs(kvm);
>
> /*
> * Initialise the default PMUver before there is a chance to
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c
> index 71b12094d613..d2ee3a1c7f03 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c
> @@ -41,6 +41,7 @@
> * 64bit interface.
> */
>
> +static u64 kvm_arm_read_id_reg(const struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u32 id);
> static u64 sys_reg_to_index(const struct sys_reg_desc *reg);
>
> static bool read_from_write_only(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
> @@ -364,7 +365,7 @@ static bool trap_loregion(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
> struct sys_reg_params *p,
> const struct sys_reg_desc *r)
> {
> - u64 val = read_sanitised_ftr_reg(SYS_ID_AA64MMFR1_EL1);
> + u64 val = kvm_arm_read_id_reg(vcpu, SYS_ID_AA64MMFR1_EL1);
> u32 sr = reg_to_encoding(r);
>
> if (!(val & (0xfUL << ID_AA64MMFR1_EL1_LO_SHIFT))) {
> @@ -1208,16 +1209,9 @@ static u8 pmuver_to_perfmon(u8 pmuver)
> }
> }
>
> -/* Read a sanitised cpufeature ID register by sys_reg_desc */
> -static u64 read_id_reg(const struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct sys_reg_desc
> const *r)
> +static u64 kvm_arm_read_id_reg(const struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u32 id)
> {
> - u32 id = reg_to_encoding(r);
> - u64 val;
> -
> - if (sysreg_visible_as_raz(vcpu, r))
> - return 0;
> -
> - val = read_sanitised_ftr_reg(id);
> + u64 val = IDREG(vcpu->kvm, id);
>
> switch (id) {
> case SYS_ID_AA64PFR0_EL1:
> @@ -1280,6 +1274,26 @@ static u64 read_id_reg(const struct kvm_vcpu
> *vcpu, struct sys_reg_desc const *r
> return val;
> }
>
> +/* Read a sanitised cpufeature ID register by sys_reg_desc */
> +static u64 read_id_reg(const struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct sys_reg_desc
> const *r)
> +{
> + if (sysreg_visible_as_raz(vcpu, r))
> + return 0;
> +
> + return kvm_arm_read_id_reg(vcpu, reg_to_encoding(r));
> +}
> +
> +/*
> + * Return true if the register's (Op0, Op1, CRn, CRm, Op2) is
> + * (3, 0, 0, crm, op2), where 1<=crm<8, 0<=op2<8.
> + */
> +static inline bool is_id_reg(u32 id)
> +{
> + return (sys_reg_Op0(id) == 3 && sys_reg_Op1(id) == 0 &&
> + sys_reg_CRn(id) == 0 && sys_reg_CRm(id) >= 1 &&
> + sys_reg_CRm(id) < 8);
> +}
> +
> static unsigned int id_visibility(const struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
> const struct sys_reg_desc *r)
> {
> @@ -2244,8 +2258,8 @@ static bool trap_dbgdidr(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
> if (p->is_write) {
> return ignore_write(vcpu, p);
> } else {
> - u64 dfr = read_sanitised_ftr_reg(SYS_ID_AA64DFR0_EL1);
> - u64 pfr = read_sanitised_ftr_reg(SYS_ID_AA64PFR0_EL1);
> + u64 dfr = kvm_arm_read_id_reg(vcpu, SYS_ID_AA64DFR0_EL1);
> + u64 pfr = kvm_arm_read_id_reg(vcpu, SYS_ID_AA64PFR0_EL1);
Does this change the behavior slightly as now within the kvm_arm_read_id_reg()
the val will be further adjusted based on KVM/vCPU?
Thanks,
Shameer
> u32 el3 = !!cpuid_feature_extract_unsigned_field(pfr,
> ID_AA64PFR0_EL1_EL3_SHIFT);
>
> p->regval = ((((dfr >> ID_AA64DFR0_EL1_WRPs_SHIFT) & 0xf) <<
> 28) |
> @@ -3343,6 +3357,37 @@ int kvm_arm_copy_sys_reg_indices(struct
> kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 __user *uindices)
> return write_demux_regids(uindices);
> }
>
> +/*
> + * Set the guest's ID registers with ID_SANITISED() to the host's sanitized
> value.
> + */
> +void kvm_arm_init_id_regs(struct kvm *kvm)
> +{
> + const struct sys_reg_desc *idreg;
> + struct sys_reg_params params;
> + u32 id;
> +
> + /* Find the first idreg (SYS_ID_PFR0_EL1) in sys_reg_descs. */
> + id = SYS_ID_PFR0_EL1;
> + params = encoding_to_params(id);
> + idreg = find_reg(¶ms, sys_reg_descs, ARRAY_SIZE(sys_reg_descs));
> + if (WARN_ON(!idreg))
> + return;
> +
> + /* Initialize all idregs */
> + while (is_id_reg(id)) {
> + /*
> + * Some hidden ID registers which are not in arm64_ftr_regs[]
> + * would cause warnings from read_sanitised_ftr_reg().
> + * Skip those ID registers to avoid the warnings.
> + */
> + if (idreg->visibility != raz_visibility)
> + IDREG(kvm, id) = read_sanitised_ftr_reg(id);
> +
> + idreg++;
> + id = reg_to_encoding(idreg);
> + }
> +}
> +
> int __init kvm_sys_reg_table_init(void)
> {
> bool valid = true;
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.h b/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.h
> index 6b11f2cc7146..eba10de2e7ae 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.h
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.h
> @@ -27,6 +27,13 @@ struct sys_reg_params {
> bool is_write;
> };
>
> +#define encoding_to_params(reg) \
> + ((struct sys_reg_params){ .Op0 = sys_reg_Op0(reg), \
> + .Op1 = sys_reg_Op1(reg), \
> + .CRn = sys_reg_CRn(reg), \
> + .CRm = sys_reg_CRm(reg), \
> + .Op2 = sys_reg_Op2(reg) })
> +
> #define esr_sys64_to_params(esr)
> \
> ((struct sys_reg_params){ .Op0 = ((esr) >> 20) & 3,
> \
> .Op1 = ((esr) >> 14) & 0x7, \
> --
> 2.40.1.606.ga4b1b128d6-goog
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-05-18 7:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-05-17 6:10 [PATCH v9 0/5] Support writable CPU ID registers from userspace Jing Zhang
2023-05-17 6:10 ` [PATCH v9 1/5] KVM: arm64: Save ID registers' sanitized value per guest Jing Zhang
2023-05-18 7:17 ` Shameerali Kolothum Thodi [this message]
2023-05-18 19:48 ` Jing Zhang
2023-05-19 8:08 ` Shameerali Kolothum Thodi
2023-05-19 17:44 ` Jing Zhang
2023-05-19 22:16 ` Reiji Watanabe
2023-05-22 17:27 ` Jing Zhang
2023-05-17 6:10 ` [PATCH v9 2/5] KVM: arm64: Use per guest ID register for ID_AA64PFR0_EL1.[CSV2|CSV3] Jing Zhang
2023-05-19 23:52 ` Reiji Watanabe
2023-05-22 17:23 ` Jing Zhang
2023-05-17 6:10 ` [PATCH v9 3/5] KVM: arm64: Use per guest ID register for ID_AA64DFR0_EL1.PMUVer Jing Zhang
2023-05-17 6:10 ` [PATCH v9 4/5] KVM: arm64: Reuse fields of sys_reg_desc for idreg Jing Zhang
2023-05-17 6:10 ` [PATCH v9 5/5] KVM: arm64: Refactor writings for PMUVer/CSV2/CSV3 Jing Zhang
2023-06-02 1:03 ` Suraj Jitindar Singh
2023-06-02 8:15 ` 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=2e727b02fe9141098ed474ef49ddc495@huawei.com \
--to=shameerali.kolothum.thodi@huawei.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=oupton@google.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=rananta@google.com \
--cc=reijiw@google.com \
--cc=suzuki.poulose@arm.com \
--cc=tabba@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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox