Re: [PATCH v3 13/47] KVM: arm64: Use kernel-space partid configuration for hypercalls

Ben Horgan
2026-01-14T14:40:05Z

Hi Marc,

On 1/14/26 12:09, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On Mon, 12 Jan 2026 16:58:40 +0000,
> Ben Horgan <ben.horgan@arm.com> wrote:
>>
>> On nVHE systems whether or not MPAM is enabled, EL2 continues to use
>> partid-0 for hypercalls, even when the host may have configured its kernel
>> threads to use a different partid. 0 may have been assigned to another
>> task. Copy the EL1 MPAM register to EL2. This ensures hypercalls use the
>> same partid as the kernel thread does on the host.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Ben Horgan <ben.horgan@arm.com>
>> ---
>> Changes since v2:
>> Use mask
>> Use read_sysreg_el1 to cope with hvhe
>> ---
>> arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/nvhe/hyp-main.c | 8 ++++++++
>> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/nvhe/hyp-main.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/nvhe/hyp-main.c
>> index a7c689152f68..ad99d8a73a9e 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/nvhe/hyp-main.c
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/nvhe/hyp-main.c
>> @@ -635,6 +635,14 @@ static void handle_host_hcall(struct kvm_cpu_context *host_ctxt)
>> unsigned long hcall_min = 0;
>> hcall_t hfn;
>>
>> + if (system_supports_mpam()) {
>> + u64 mask = MPAM1_EL1_PARTID_D | MPAM1_EL1_PARTID_I |
>> + MPAM1_EL1_PMG_D | MPAM1_EL1_PMG_I;
>> +
>> + write_sysreg_s(read_sysreg_el1(SYS_MPAM1) & mask, SYS_MPAM2_EL2);
>> + isb();
>> + }
>
> Is it really OK to not preserve the rest of MPAM2_EL2? This explicitly
> clears MPAM2_EL2.MPAMEN, which feels counter-productive.
>
> M.
>

There are 3 things to consider:
1. traps - these are only relevant when we leave EL2 and are dealt with
in __activate_traps_mpam(). (This also covers EnMPAMSM which is a
not-trap bit.)
2. MPAM2_EL2.MPAMEN - this is read only as long as we have an EL3 and if
we don't have EL3 will be 0 anyway from el2_setup.h and MPAM won't be
considered supported in the kernel.
3. The alternate partid space fields which are kept as zero and relate
to FEAT_RME.

So, safe. Ok with you or would you rather I make it more obviously safe?

Thanks,

Ben