From: "Alex Bennée" <alex.bennee@linaro.org>
To: Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@arm.com>
Cc: Okamoto Takayuki <tokamoto@jp.fujitsu.com>,
Christoffer Dall <cdall@kernel.org>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>,
Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 06/23] arm64/sve: Check SVE virtualisability
Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2018 15:39:01 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87in0ycpuy.fsf@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1538141967-15375-7-git-send-email-Dave.Martin@arm.com>
Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@arm.com> writes:
> Due to the way the effective SVE vector length is controlled and
> trapped at different exception levels, certain mismatches in the
> sets of vector lengths supported by different physical CPUs in the
> system may prevent straightforward virtualisation of SVE at parity
> with the host.
>
> This patch analyses the extent to which SVE can be virtualised
> safely without interfering with migration of vcpus between physical
> CPUs, and rejects late secondary CPUs that would erode the
> situation further.
>
> It is left up to KVM to decide what to do with this information.
>
> Signed-off-by: Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@arm.com>
> ---
>
> Changes since RFCv1:
>
> * The analysis done by this patch is the same as in the previous
> version, but the commit message the printks etc. have been reworded
> to avoid the suggestion that KVM is expected to work on a system with
> mismatched SVE implementations.
> ---
> arch/arm64/include/asm/fpsimd.h | 1 +
> arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c | 2 +-
> arch/arm64/kernel/fpsimd.c | 87 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------
> 3 files changed, 76 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/fpsimd.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/fpsimd.h
> index dd1ad39..964adc9 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/fpsimd.h
> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/fpsimd.h
> @@ -87,6 +87,7 @@ extern void sve_kernel_enable(const struct arm64_cpu_capabilities *__unused);
> extern u64 read_zcr_features(void);
>
> extern int __ro_after_init sve_max_vl;
> +extern int __ro_after_init sve_max_virtualisable_vl;
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_ARM64_SVE
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
> index e238b79..aa1a55b 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
> @@ -1531,7 +1531,7 @@ static void verify_sve_features(void)
> unsigned int len = zcr & ZCR_ELx_LEN_MASK;
>
> if (len < safe_len || sve_verify_vq_map()) {
> - pr_crit("CPU%d: SVE: required vector length(s) missing\n",
> + pr_crit("CPU%d: SVE: vector length support mismatch\n",
> smp_processor_id());
> cpu_die_early();
> }
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/fpsimd.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/fpsimd.c
> index 42aa154..d28042b 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/fpsimd.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/fpsimd.c
> @@ -18,6 +18,7 @@
> */
>
> #include <linux/bitmap.h>
> +#include <linux/bitops.h>
> #include <linux/bottom_half.h>
> #include <linux/bug.h>
> #include <linux/cache.h>
> @@ -48,6 +49,7 @@
> #include <asm/sigcontext.h>
> #include <asm/sysreg.h>
> #include <asm/traps.h>
> +#include <asm/virt.h>
>
> #define FPEXC_IOF (1 << 0)
> #define FPEXC_DZF (1 << 1)
> @@ -130,14 +132,18 @@ static int sve_default_vl = -1;
>
> /* Maximum supported vector length across all CPUs (initially poisoned) */
> int __ro_after_init sve_max_vl = SVE_VL_MIN;
> +int __ro_after_init sve_max_virtualisable_vl = SVE_VL_MIN;
> /* Set of available vector lengths, as vq_to_bit(vq): */
> static __ro_after_init DECLARE_BITMAP(sve_vq_map, SVE_VQ_MAX);
> +/* Set of vector lengths present on at least one cpu: */
> +static __ro_after_init DECLARE_BITMAP(sve_vq_partial_map, SVE_VQ_MAX);
> static void __percpu *efi_sve_state;
>
> #else /* ! CONFIG_ARM64_SVE */
>
> /* Dummy declaration for code that will be optimised out: */
> extern __ro_after_init DECLARE_BITMAP(sve_vq_map, SVE_VQ_MAX);
> +extern __ro_after_init DECLARE_BITMAP(sve_vq_partial_map, SVE_VQ_MAX);
> extern void __percpu *efi_sve_state;
>
> #endif /* ! CONFIG_ARM64_SVE */
> @@ -623,11 +629,8 @@ int sve_get_current_vl(void)
> return sve_prctl_status(0);
> }
>
> -/*
> - * Bitmap for temporary storage of the per-CPU set of supported vector lengths
> - * during secondary boot.
> - */
> -static DECLARE_BITMAP(sve_secondary_vq_map, SVE_VQ_MAX);
> +/* Bitmaps for temporary storage during manipulation of vector length sets */
> +static DECLARE_BITMAP(sve_tmp_vq_map, SVE_VQ_MAX);
This seems odd as a local global, why not declared locally when used?
>
> static void sve_probe_vqs(DECLARE_BITMAP(map, SVE_VQ_MAX))
> {
> @@ -650,6 +653,7 @@ static void sve_probe_vqs(DECLARE_BITMAP(map, SVE_VQ_MAX))
> void __init sve_init_vq_map(void)
> {
> sve_probe_vqs(sve_vq_map);
> + bitmap_copy(sve_vq_partial_map, sve_vq_map, SVE_VQ_MAX);
> }
>
> /*
> @@ -658,24 +662,60 @@ void __init sve_init_vq_map(void)
> */
> void sve_update_vq_map(void)
> {
> - sve_probe_vqs(sve_secondary_vq_map);
> - bitmap_and(sve_vq_map, sve_vq_map, sve_secondary_vq_map, SVE_VQ_MAX);
> + sve_probe_vqs(sve_tmp_vq_map);
> + bitmap_and(sve_vq_map, sve_vq_map, sve_tmp_vq_map,
> + SVE_VQ_MAX);
> + bitmap_or(sve_vq_partial_map, sve_vq_partial_map, sve_tmp_vq_map,
> + SVE_VQ_MAX);
> }
I'm not quite following what's going on here. This is tracking both the
vector lengths available on all CPUs and the ones available on at least
one CPU? This raises a some questions:
- do such franken-machines exist or are expected to exit?
- how do we ensure this is always upto date?
- what happens when we hotplug a new CPU with less available VQ?
>
> /* Check whether the current CPU supports all VQs in the committed set */
> int sve_verify_vq_map(void)
> {
> - int ret = 0;
> + int ret = -EINVAL;
> + unsigned long b;
>
> - sve_probe_vqs(sve_secondary_vq_map);
> - bitmap_andnot(sve_secondary_vq_map, sve_vq_map, sve_secondary_vq_map,
> - SVE_VQ_MAX);
> - if (!bitmap_empty(sve_secondary_vq_map, SVE_VQ_MAX)) {
> + sve_probe_vqs(sve_tmp_vq_map);
> +
> + bitmap_complement(sve_tmp_vq_map, sve_tmp_vq_map, SVE_VQ_MAX);
> + if (bitmap_intersects(sve_tmp_vq_map, sve_vq_map, SVE_VQ_MAX)) {
> pr_warn("SVE: cpu%d: Required vector length(s) missing\n",
> smp_processor_id());
> - ret = -EINVAL;
> + goto error;
The use of goto seems a little premature considering we don't have any
clean-up to do.
> + }
> +
> + if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_KVM) || !is_hyp_mode_available())
> + goto ok;
> +
> + /*
> + * For KVM, it is necessary to ensure that this CPU doesn't
> + * support any vector length that guests may have probed as
> + * unsupported.
> + */
> +
> + /* Recover the set of supported VQs: */
> + bitmap_complement(sve_tmp_vq_map, sve_tmp_vq_map, SVE_VQ_MAX);
> + /* Find VQs supported that are not globally supported: */
> + bitmap_andnot(sve_tmp_vq_map, sve_tmp_vq_map, sve_vq_map, SVE_VQ_MAX);
> +
> + /* Find the lowest such VQ, if any: */
> + b = find_last_bit(sve_tmp_vq_map, SVE_VQ_MAX);
> + if (b >= SVE_VQ_MAX)
> + goto ok; /* no mismatches */
> +
> + /*
> + * Mismatches above sve_max_virtualisable_vl are fine, since
> + * no guest is allowed to configure ZCR_EL2.LEN to exceed this:
> + */
> + if (sve_vl_from_vq(bit_to_vq(b)) <= sve_max_virtualisable_vl) {
> + pr_warn("SVE: cpu%d: Unsupported vector length(s) present\n",
> + smp_processor_id());
> + goto error;
> }
>
> +ok:
> + ret = 0;
> +error:
> return ret;
> }
>
> @@ -743,6 +783,7 @@ u64 read_zcr_features(void)
> void __init sve_setup(void)
> {
> u64 zcr;
> + unsigned long b;
>
> if (!system_supports_sve())
> return;
> @@ -771,11 +812,31 @@ void __init sve_setup(void)
> */
> sve_default_vl = find_supported_vector_length(64);
>
> + bitmap_andnot(sve_tmp_vq_map, sve_vq_partial_map, sve_vq_map,
> + SVE_VQ_MAX);
> +
> + b = find_last_bit(sve_tmp_vq_map, SVE_VQ_MAX);
> + if (b >= SVE_VQ_MAX)
> + /* No non-virtualisable VLs found */
> + sve_max_virtualisable_vl = SVE_VQ_MAX;
> + else if (WARN_ON(b == SVE_VQ_MAX - 1))
> + /* No virtualisable VLs? This is architecturally forbidden. */
> + sve_max_virtualisable_vl = SVE_VQ_MIN;
> + else /* b + 1 < SVE_VQ_MAX */
> + sve_max_virtualisable_vl = sve_vl_from_vq(bit_to_vq(b + 1));
> +
> + if (sve_max_virtualisable_vl > sve_max_vl)
> + sve_max_virtualisable_vl = sve_max_vl;
> +
> pr_info("SVE: maximum available vector length %u bytes per vector\n",
> sve_max_vl);
> pr_info("SVE: default vector length %u bytes per vector\n",
> sve_default_vl);
>
> + /* KVM decides whether to support mismatched systems. Just warn here: */
> + if (sve_max_virtualisable_vl < sve_max_vl)
> + pr_info("SVE: unvirtualisable vector lengths present\n");
> +
> sve_efi_setup();
> }
--
Alex Bennée
_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-11-15 15:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 77+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-09-28 13:39 [RFC PATCH v2 00/23] KVM: arm64: Initial support for SVE guests Dave Martin
2018-09-28 13:39 ` [RFC PATCH v2 01/23] arm64: fpsimd: Always set TIF_FOREIGN_FPSTATE on task state flush Dave Martin
2018-09-28 13:39 ` [RFC PATCH v2 02/23] KVM: arm64: Delete orphaned declaration for __fpsimd_enabled() Dave Martin
2018-09-28 13:39 ` [RFC PATCH v2 03/23] KVM: arm64: Refactor kvm_arm_num_regs() for easier maintenance Dave Martin
2018-09-28 13:39 ` [RFC PATCH v2 04/23] KVM: arm64: Add missing #include of <linux/bitmap.h> to kvm_host.h Dave Martin
2018-09-28 13:39 ` [RFC PATCH v2 05/23] KVM: arm: Add arch vcpu uninit hook Dave Martin
2018-11-02 8:05 ` Christoffer Dall
2018-11-15 16:40 ` Dave Martin
2018-11-20 10:56 ` Christoffer Dall
2018-09-28 13:39 ` [RFC PATCH v2 06/23] arm64/sve: Check SVE virtualisability Dave Martin
2018-11-15 15:39 ` Alex Bennée [this message]
2018-11-15 17:09 ` Dave Martin
2018-11-16 12:32 ` Alex Bennée
2018-11-16 15:09 ` Dave Martin
2018-09-28 13:39 ` [RFC PATCH v2 07/23] arm64/sve: Enable SVE state tracking for non-task contexts Dave Martin
2018-09-28 13:39 ` [RFC PATCH v2 08/23] KVM: arm64: Add a vcpu flag to control SVE visibility for the guest Dave Martin
2018-11-15 15:44 ` Alex Bennée
2018-09-28 13:39 ` [RFC PATCH v2 09/23] KVM: arm64: Propagate vcpu into read_id_reg() Dave Martin
2018-11-15 15:56 ` Alex Bennée
2018-09-28 13:39 ` [RFC PATCH v2 10/23] KVM: arm64: Extend reset_unknown() to handle mixed RES0/UNKNOWN registers Dave Martin
2018-11-02 8:11 ` Christoffer Dall
2018-11-15 17:11 ` Dave Martin
2018-09-28 13:39 ` [RFC PATCH v2 11/23] KVM: arm64: Support runtime sysreg filtering for KVM_GET_REG_LIST Dave Martin
2018-11-02 8:16 ` Christoffer Dall
2018-11-15 17:27 ` Dave Martin
2018-11-22 10:53 ` Christoffer Dall
2018-11-22 11:13 ` Peter Maydell
2018-11-22 12:34 ` Christoffer Dall
2018-11-22 12:59 ` Peter Maydell
2018-11-22 11:27 ` Alex Bennée
2018-11-22 12:32 ` Dave P Martin
2018-11-22 13:07 ` Christoffer Dall
2018-11-23 17:42 ` Dave Martin
2018-09-28 13:39 ` [RFC PATCH v2 12/23] KVM: arm64/sve: System register context switch and access support Dave Martin
2018-11-15 16:37 ` Alex Bennée
2018-11-15 17:59 ` Dave Martin
2018-09-28 13:39 ` [RFC PATCH v2 13/23] KVM: arm64/sve: Context switch the SVE registers Dave Martin
2018-11-19 16:36 ` Alex Bennée
2018-11-19 17:03 ` Dave Martin
2018-11-20 12:25 ` Alex Bennée
2018-11-20 14:17 ` Dave Martin
2018-11-20 15:30 ` Alex Bennée
2018-11-20 17:18 ` Dave Martin
2018-09-28 13:39 ` [RFC PATCH v2 14/23] KVM: Allow 2048-bit register access via ioctl interface Dave Martin
2018-11-19 16:48 ` Alex Bennée
2018-11-19 17:07 ` Dave Martin
2018-11-20 11:20 ` Alex Bennée
2018-09-28 13:39 ` [RFC PATCH v2 15/23] KVM: arm64/sve: Add SVE support to register access " Dave Martin
2018-11-21 15:20 ` Alex Bennée
2018-11-21 18:05 ` Dave Martin
2018-09-28 13:39 ` [RFC PATCH v2 16/23] KVM: arm64: Enumerate SVE register indices for KVM_GET_REG_LIST Dave Martin
2018-11-21 16:09 ` Alex Bennée
2018-11-21 16:32 ` Dave Martin
2018-11-21 16:49 ` Alex Bennée
2018-11-21 17:46 ` Dave Martin
2018-09-28 13:39 ` [RFC PATCH v2 17/23] arm64/sve: In-kernel vector length availability query interface Dave Martin
2018-11-21 16:16 ` Alex Bennée
2018-11-21 16:35 ` Dave Martin
2018-11-21 16:46 ` Alex Bennée
2018-09-28 13:39 ` [RFC PATCH v2 18/23] KVM: arm64: Add arch vcpu ioctl hook Dave Martin
2018-11-02 8:30 ` Christoffer Dall
2018-09-28 13:39 ` [RFC PATCH v2 19/23] KVM: arm64/sve: Report and enable SVE API extensions for userspace Dave Martin
2018-11-22 15:23 ` Alex Bennée
2018-12-05 18:22 ` Dave Martin
2018-09-28 13:39 ` [RFC PATCH v2 20/23] KVM: arm64: Add arch vm ioctl hook Dave Martin
2018-11-02 8:32 ` Christoffer Dall
2018-11-15 18:04 ` Dave Martin
2018-11-20 10:58 ` Christoffer Dall
2018-11-20 14:19 ` Dave Martin
2018-09-28 13:39 ` [RFC PATCH v2 21/23] KVM: arm64/sve: allow KVM_ARM_SVE_CONFIG_QUERY on vm fd Dave Martin
2018-11-22 15:29 ` Alex Bennée
2018-09-28 13:39 ` [RFC PATCH v2 22/23] KVM: Documentation: Document arm64 core registers in detail Dave Martin
2018-09-28 13:39 ` [RFC PATCH v2 23/23] KVM: arm64/sve: Document KVM API extensions for SVE Dave Martin
2018-11-22 15:31 ` Alex Bennée
2018-12-05 17:59 ` Dave Martin
2018-11-22 15:34 ` [RFC PATCH v2 00/23] KVM: arm64: Initial support for SVE guests Alex Bennée
2018-12-04 15:50 ` Dave Martin
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=87in0ycpuy.fsf@linaro.org \
--to=alex.bennee@linaro.org \
--cc=Dave.Martin@arm.com \
--cc=ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=cdall@kernel.org \
--cc=kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=marc.zyngier@arm.com \
--cc=tokamoto@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=will.deacon@arm.com \
/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