From: Reiji Watanabe <reijiw@google.com>
To: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>, kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu
Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
Peter Shier <pshier@google.com>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [RFC PATCH v2 17/28] KVM: arm64: Add consistency checking for frac fields of ID registers
Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2021 23:25:09 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20211103062520.1445832-18-reijiw@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20211103062520.1445832-1-reijiw@google.com>
Feature fractional field of an ID register cannot be simply validated
at KVM_SET_ONE_REG because its validity depends on its (main) feature
field value, which could be in a different ID register (and might be
set later).
Validate fractional fields at the first KVM_RUN instead.
Signed-off-by: Reiji Watanabe <reijiw@google.com>
---
arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c | 121 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
1 file changed, 117 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c
index 1b4ffbf539a7..ec984fd4e319 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c
+++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c
@@ -817,9 +817,6 @@ static struct id_reg_info id_aa64pfr0_el1_info = {
static struct id_reg_info id_aa64pfr1_el1_info = {
.sys_reg = SYS_ID_AA64PFR1_EL1,
- .ftr_check_types = U_FCT(ID_AA64PFR1_RASFRAC_SHIFT, FCT_IGNORE) |
- U_FCT(ID_AA64PFR1_MPAMFRAC_SHIFT, FCT_IGNORE) |
- U_FCT(ID_AA64PFR1_CSV2FRAC_SHIFT, FCT_IGNORE),
.init = init_id_aa64pfr1_el1_info,
.validate = validate_id_aa64pfr1_el1,
.get_reset_val = get_reset_id_aa64pfr1_el1,
@@ -3407,10 +3404,86 @@ int kvm_arm_copy_sys_reg_indices(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 __user *uindices)
return write_demux_regids(uindices);
}
+/* ID register's fractional field information with its feature field. */
+struct feature_frac {
+ u32 id;
+ u32 shift;
+ u32 frac_id;
+ u32 frac_shift;
+ u8 frac_ftr_check;
+};
+
+static struct feature_frac feature_frac_table[] = {
+ {
+ .frac_id = SYS_ID_AA64PFR1_EL1,
+ .frac_shift = ID_AA64PFR1_RASFRAC_SHIFT,
+ .id = SYS_ID_AA64PFR0_EL1,
+ .shift = ID_AA64PFR0_RAS_SHIFT,
+ },
+ {
+ .frac_id = SYS_ID_AA64PFR1_EL1,
+ .frac_shift = ID_AA64PFR1_MPAMFRAC_SHIFT,
+ .id = SYS_ID_AA64PFR0_EL1,
+ .shift = ID_AA64PFR0_MPAM_SHIFT,
+ },
+ {
+ .frac_id = SYS_ID_AA64PFR1_EL1,
+ .frac_shift = ID_AA64PFR1_CSV2FRAC_SHIFT,
+ .id = SYS_ID_AA64PFR0_EL1,
+ .shift = ID_AA64PFR0_CSV2_SHIFT,
+ },
+};
+
+/*
+ * Return non-zero if the feature/fractional fields pair are not
+ * supported. Return zero otherwise.
+ * This function only checks fractional feature field and assumes
+ * the feature field is valid.
+ */
+static int vcpu_id_reg_feature_frac_check(const struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
+ const struct feature_frac *ftr_frac)
+{
+ u32 id;
+ int fval, flim, ret;
+ u64 val, lim, mask;
+ const struct id_reg_info *id_reg;
+ bool sign = FCT_SIGN(ftr_frac->frac_ftr_check);
+ enum feature_check_type type = FCT_TYPE(ftr_frac->frac_ftr_check);
+
+ /* Check if the feature field value is same as the limit */
+ id = ftr_frac->id;
+ id_reg = GET_ID_REG_INFO(id);
+
+ val = __vcpu_sys_reg(vcpu, IDREG_SYS_IDX(id));
+ lim = id_reg ? id_reg->vcpu_limit_val : read_sanitised_ftr_reg(id);
+
+ mask = (u64)ARM64_FEATURE_FIELD_MASK << ftr_frac->shift;
+ if ((val & mask) != (lim & mask))
+ /*
+ * The feature level is smaller than the limit.
+ * Any fractional version should be fine.
+ */
+ return 0;
+
+ /* Check the fractional feature field */
+ id = ftr_frac->frac_id;
+ id_reg = GET_ID_REG_INFO(id);
+
+ val = __vcpu_sys_reg(vcpu, IDREG_SYS_IDX(id));
+ fval = cpuid_feature_extract_field(val, ftr_frac->frac_shift, sign);
+
+ lim = id_reg ? id_reg->vcpu_limit_val : read_sanitised_ftr_reg(id);
+ flim = cpuid_feature_extract_field(lim, ftr_frac->frac_shift, sign);
+
+ ret = arm64_check_feature_one(type, fval, flim);
+ return ret ? -E2BIG : 0;
+}
+
int kvm_id_regs_consistency_check(const struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
{
- int i;
+ int i, err;
const struct kvm_vcpu *t_vcpu;
+ const struct feature_frac *frac;
/*
* Make sure vcpu->arch.has_run_once is visible for others so that
@@ -3431,6 +3504,17 @@ int kvm_id_regs_consistency_check(const struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
KVM_ARM_ID_REG_MAX_NUM))
return -EINVAL;
}
+
+ /*
+ * Check ID registers' fractional fields, which aren't checked
+ * at KVM_SET_ONE_REG.
+ */
+ for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(feature_frac_table); i++) {
+ frac = &feature_frac_table[i];
+ err = vcpu_id_reg_feature_frac_check(vcpu, frac);
+ if (err)
+ return err;
+ }
return 0;
}
@@ -3438,6 +3522,9 @@ static void id_reg_info_init_all(void)
{
int i;
struct id_reg_info *id_reg;
+ struct feature_frac *frac;
+ u64 mask = ARM64_FEATURE_FIELD_MASK;
+ u64 org;
for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(id_reg_info_table); i++) {
id_reg = (struct id_reg_info *)id_reg_info_table[i];
@@ -3446,6 +3533,32 @@ static void id_reg_info_init_all(void)
id_reg_info_init(id_reg);
}
+
+ for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(feature_frac_table); i++) {
+ frac = &feature_frac_table[i];
+ id_reg = GET_ID_REG_INFO(frac->frac_id);
+
+ /*
+ * An ID register that has fractional fields is expected
+ * to have its own id_reg_info.
+ */
+ if (WARN_ON_ONCE(!id_reg))
+ continue;
+
+ /*
+ * Update the id_reg's ftr_check_types for the fractional
+ * field with FCT_IGNORE so that the field won't be validated
+ * when the ID register is set by userspace, which could
+ * temporarily cause an inconsistency if its (main) feature
+ * field is not set yet. Save the original ftr_check_types
+ * for the fractional field to validate the field later.
+ */
+ org = (id_reg->ftr_check_types >> frac->frac_shift) & mask;
+ id_reg->ftr_check_types &= ~(mask << frac->frac_shift);
+ id_reg->ftr_check_types |=
+ MAKE_FCT(frac->frac_shift, FCT_IGNORE, FCT_SIGN(org));
+ frac->frac_ftr_check = org;
+ }
}
void kvm_sys_reg_table_init(void)
--
2.33.1.1089.g2158813163f-goog
_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-11-03 6:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-11-03 6:24 [RFC PATCH v2 00/28] KVM: arm64: Make CPU ID registers writable by userspace Reiji Watanabe
2021-11-03 6:24 ` [RFC PATCH v2 01/28] KVM: arm64: Add has_reset_once flag for vcpu Reiji Watanabe
2021-11-04 16:10 ` Oliver Upton
2021-11-03 6:24 ` [RFC PATCH v2 02/28] KVM: arm64: Save ID registers' sanitized value per vCPU Reiji Watanabe
2021-11-04 16:14 ` Oliver Upton
2021-11-04 21:39 ` Reiji Watanabe
2021-11-05 1:33 ` Oliver Upton
2021-11-05 6:25 ` Reiji Watanabe
2021-11-03 6:24 ` [RFC PATCH v2 03/28] KVM: arm64: Introduce struct id_reg_info Reiji Watanabe
2021-11-03 6:24 ` [RFC PATCH v2 04/28] KVM: arm64: Keep consistency of ID registers between vCPUs Reiji Watanabe
2021-11-04 16:33 ` Oliver Upton
2021-11-08 7:45 ` Reiji Watanabe
2021-11-03 6:24 ` [RFC PATCH v2 05/28] KVM: arm64: Make ID_AA64PFR0_EL1 writable Reiji Watanabe
2021-11-03 6:24 ` [RFC PATCH v2 06/28] KVM: arm64: Make ID_AA64PFR1_EL1 writable Reiji Watanabe
2021-11-03 6:24 ` [RFC PATCH v2 07/28] KVM: arm64: Make ID_AA64ISAR0_EL1 writable Reiji Watanabe
2021-11-03 6:25 ` [RFC PATCH v2 08/28] KVM: arm64: Make ID_AA64ISAR1_EL1 writable Reiji Watanabe
2021-11-03 6:25 ` [RFC PATCH v2 09/28] KVM: arm64: Make ID_AA64MMFR0_EL1 writable Reiji Watanabe
2021-11-03 6:25 ` [RFC PATCH v2 10/28] KVM: arm64: Hide IMPLEMENTATION DEFINED PMU support for the guest Reiji Watanabe
2021-11-03 6:25 ` [RFC PATCH v2 11/28] KVM: arm64: Make ID_AA64DFR0_EL1 writable Reiji Watanabe
2021-11-03 6:25 ` [RFC PATCH v2 12/28] KVM: arm64: Make ID_DFR0_EL1 writable Reiji Watanabe
2021-11-03 6:25 ` [RFC PATCH v2 13/28] KVM: arm64: Make ID_DFR1_EL1 writable Reiji Watanabe
2021-11-03 6:25 ` [RFC PATCH v2 14/28] KVM: arm64: Make ID_MMFR0_EL1 writable Reiji Watanabe
2021-11-03 6:25 ` [RFC PATCH v2 15/28] KVM: arm64: Make MVFR1_EL1 writable Reiji Watanabe
2021-11-03 6:25 ` [RFC PATCH v2 16/28] KVM: arm64: Make ID registers without id_reg_info writable Reiji Watanabe
2021-11-03 6:25 ` Reiji Watanabe [this message]
2021-11-03 6:25 ` [RFC PATCH v2 18/28] KVM: arm64: Introduce KVM_CAP_ARM_ID_REG_WRITABLE capability Reiji Watanabe
2021-11-04 16:40 ` Oliver Upton
2021-11-05 4:07 ` Reiji Watanabe
2021-11-03 6:25 ` [RFC PATCH v2 19/28] KVM: arm64: Use vcpu->arch cptr_el2 to track value of cptr_el2 for VHE Reiji Watanabe
2021-11-03 6:25 ` [RFC PATCH v2 20/28] KVM: arm64: Use vcpu->arch.mdcr_el2 to track value of mdcr_el2 Reiji Watanabe
2021-11-03 6:25 ` [RFC PATCH v2 21/28] KVM: arm64: Introduce framework to trap disabled features Reiji Watanabe
2021-11-03 6:25 ` [RFC PATCH v2 22/28] KVM: arm64: Trap disabled features of ID_AA64PFR0_EL1 Reiji Watanabe
2021-11-03 6:25 ` [RFC PATCH v2 23/28] KVM: arm64: Trap disabled features of ID_AA64PFR1_EL1 Reiji Watanabe
2021-11-03 6:25 ` [RFC PATCH v2 24/28] KVM: arm64: Trap disabled features of ID_AA64DFR0_EL1 Reiji Watanabe
2021-11-03 6:25 ` [RFC PATCH v2 25/28] KVM: arm64: Trap disabled features of ID_AA64MMFR1_EL1 Reiji Watanabe
2021-11-03 6:25 ` [RFC PATCH v2 26/28] KVM: arm64: Trap disabled features of ID_AA64ISAR1_EL1 Reiji Watanabe
2021-11-03 6:25 ` [RFC PATCH v2 27/28] KVM: arm64: Activate trapping of disabled CPU features for the guest Reiji Watanabe
2021-11-03 6:25 ` [RFC PATCH v2 28/28] KVM: arm64: selftests: Introduce id_reg_test Reiji Watanabe
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=20211103062520.1445832-18-reijiw@google.com \
--to=reijiw@google.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=pshier@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