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=ham 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 C4919C4332F for ; Fri, 24 Sep 2021 08:26:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mm01.cs.columbia.edu (mm01.cs.columbia.edu [128.59.11.253]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7841161211 for ; Fri, 24 Sep 2021 08:26:01 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 mail.kernel.org 7841161211 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=lists.cs.columbia.edu Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mm01.cs.columbia.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 244934B10A; Fri, 24 Sep 2021 04:26:01 -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 k+jGLEZETbvL; Fri, 24 Sep 2021 04:25:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mm01.cs.columbia.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mm01.cs.columbia.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id DFF004B133; Fri, 24 Sep 2021 04:25:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mm01.cs.columbia.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1EE1F4B09C for ; Fri, 24 Sep 2021 04:25:56 -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 0r0FdNVuvTBa for ; Fri, 24 Sep 2021 04:25:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by mm01.cs.columbia.edu (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 50E6E4B0DF for ; Fri, 24 Sep 2021 04:25:54 -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 407D361214; Fri, 24 Sep 2021 08:25:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from sofa.misterjones.org ([185.219.108.64] 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 1mTgWl-00ChmL-DQ; Fri, 24 Sep 2021 09:25:51 +0100 From: Marc Zyngier To: kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Subject: [PATCH 1/5] KVM: arm64: Force ID_AA64PFR0_EL1.GIC=1 when exposing a virtual GICv3 Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2021 09:25:38 +0100 Message-Id: <20210924082542.2766170-2-maz@kernel.org> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.30.2 In-Reply-To: <20210924082542.2766170-1-maz@kernel.org> References: <20210924082542.2766170-1-maz@kernel.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 185.219.108.64 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, james.morse@arm.com, suzuki.poulose@arm.com, alexandru.elisei@arm.com, eric.auger@redhat.com, christoffer.dall@arm.com, kernel-team@android.com 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 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 Until now, we always let ID_AA64PFR0_EL1.GIC reflect the value visible on the host, even if we were running a GICv2-enabled VM on a GICv3+compat host. That's fine, but we also now have the case of a host that does not expose ID_AA64PFR0_EL1.GIC==1 despite having a vGIC. Yes, this is confusing. Thank you M1. Let's go back to first principles and expose ID_AA64PFR0_EL1.GIC=1 when a GICv3 is exposed to the guest. This also hides a GICv4.1 CPU interface from the guest which has no business knowing about the v4.1 extension. Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier --- arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c | 5 +++++ 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+) diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c index 1d46e185f31e..0e8fc29df19c 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c @@ -1075,6 +1075,11 @@ static u64 read_id_reg(const struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, val |= FIELD_PREP(ARM64_FEATURE_MASK(ID_AA64PFR0_CSV2), (u64)vcpu->kvm->arch.pfr0_csv2); val &= ~ARM64_FEATURE_MASK(ID_AA64PFR0_CSV3); val |= FIELD_PREP(ARM64_FEATURE_MASK(ID_AA64PFR0_CSV3), (u64)vcpu->kvm->arch.pfr0_csv3); + if (irqchip_in_kernel(vcpu->kvm) && + vcpu->kvm->arch.vgic.vgic_model == KVM_DEV_TYPE_ARM_VGIC_V3) { + val &= ~ARM64_FEATURE_MASK(ID_AA64PFR0_GIC); + val |= FIELD_PREP(ARM64_FEATURE_MASK(ID_AA64PFR0_GIC), 1); + } break; case SYS_ID_AA64PFR1_EL1: val &= ~ARM64_FEATURE_MASK(ID_AA64PFR1_MTE); -- 2.30.2 _______________________________________________ kvmarm mailing list kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm