From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-17.0 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER, INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_GIT autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D19F7C43461 for ; Mon, 10 May 2021 17:27:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mm01.cs.columbia.edu (mm01.cs.columbia.edu [128.59.11.253]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4AB6B61574 for ; Mon, 10 May 2021 17:27:23 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 4AB6B61574 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=kvmarm-bounces@lists.cs.columbia.edu Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mm01.cs.columbia.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id E06254B456; Mon, 10 May 2021 13:27:22 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: at lists.cs.columbia.edu Received: from mm01.cs.columbia.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mm01.cs.columbia.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id OfPkcrGnV+U3; Mon, 10 May 2021 13:27:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mm01.cs.columbia.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mm01.cs.columbia.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 18FE94B4BA; Mon, 10 May 2021 13:27:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mm01.cs.columbia.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C9844B490 for ; Mon, 10 May 2021 13:27:19 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: at lists.cs.columbia.edu Received: from mm01.cs.columbia.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mm01.cs.columbia.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Qt-X56V2QC4m for ; Mon, 10 May 2021 13:27:18 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by mm01.cs.columbia.edu (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2474F4B433 for ; Mon, 10 May 2021 13:27:18 -0400 (EDT) Received: from disco-boy.misterjones.org (disco-boy.misterjones.org [51.254.78.96]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4CF2461469; Mon, 10 May 2021 17:27:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from 78.163-31-62.static.virginmediabusiness.co.uk ([62.31.163.78] helo=why.lan) by disco-boy.misterjones.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1lg9GI-000Uqg-LG; Mon, 10 May 2021 18:00:07 +0100 From: Marc Zyngier To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, kvm@vger.kernel.org Subject: [PATCH v4 21/66] KVM: arm64: nv: Handle PSCI call via smc from the guest Date: Mon, 10 May 2021 17:58:35 +0100 Message-Id: <20210510165920.1913477-22-maz@kernel.org> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.29.2 In-Reply-To: <20210510165920.1913477-1-maz@kernel.org> References: <20210510165920.1913477-1-maz@kernel.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 62.31.163.78 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, kvm@vger.kernel.org, andre.przywara@arm.com, christoffer.dall@arm.com, jintack@cs.columbia.edu, haibo.xu@linaro.org, james.morse@arm.com, suzuki.poulose@arm.com, alexandru.elisei@arm.com, kernel-team@android.com, jintack.lim@linaro.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: maz@kernel.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on disco-boy.misterjones.org); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Cc: kernel-team@android.com, Andre Przywara , Jintack Lim X-BeenThere: kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Where KVM/ARM decisions are made List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: kvmarm-bounces@lists.cs.columbia.edu Sender: kvmarm-bounces@lists.cs.columbia.edu From: Jintack Lim VMs used to execute hvc #0 for the psci call if EL3 is not implemented. However, when we come to provide the virtual EL2 mode to the VM, the host OS inside the VM calls kvm_call_hyp() which is also hvc #0. So, it's hard to differentiate between them from the host hypervisor's point of view. So, let the VM execute smc instruction for the psci call. On ARMv8.3, even if EL3 is not implemented, a smc instruction executed at non-secure EL1 is trapped to EL2 if HCR_EL2.TSC==1, rather than being treated as UNDEFINED. So, the host hypervisor can handle this psci call without any confusion. Signed-off-by: Jintack Lim Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier --- arch/arm64/kvm/handle_exit.c | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++++-- 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/handle_exit.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/handle_exit.c index fca0d44afe96..f0fc99c7c9ca 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/handle_exit.c +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/handle_exit.c @@ -62,6 +62,8 @@ static int handle_hvc(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) static int handle_smc(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) { + int ret; + /* * "If an SMC instruction executed at Non-secure EL1 is * trapped to EL2 because HCR_EL2.TSC is 1, the exception is a @@ -69,10 +71,28 @@ static int handle_smc(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) * * We need to advance the PC after the trap, as it would * otherwise return to the same address... + * + * If imm is non-zero, it's not defined, so just skip it. + */ + if (kvm_vcpu_hvc_get_imm(vcpu)) { + vcpu_set_reg(vcpu, 0, ~0UL); + kvm_incr_pc(vcpu); + return 1; + } + + /* + * If imm is zero, it's a psci call. + * Note that on ARMv8.3, even if EL3 is not implemented, SMC executed + * at Non-secure EL1 is trapped to EL2 if HCR_EL2.TSC==1, rather than + * being treated as UNDEFINED. */ - vcpu_set_reg(vcpu, 0, ~0UL); + ret = kvm_hvc_call_handler(vcpu); + if (ret < 0) + vcpu_set_reg(vcpu, 0, ~0UL); + kvm_incr_pc(vcpu); - return 1; + + return ret; } /* -- 2.29.2 _______________________________________________ kvmarm mailing list kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm