Linux KVM/arm64 development list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
To: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>, Oliver Upton <oupton@google.com>
Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>,
	Peter Shier <pshier@google.com>,
	Raghavendra Rao Anata <rananta@google.com>,
	David Matlack <dmatlack@google.com>,
	kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/10] KVM: arm64: Implement initial support for KVM_CAP_SYSTEM_COUNTER_STATE
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2021 08:26:03 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <9c5f19f9-b303-573a-aa2a-cf5a91110db8@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <877dj3z68p.wl-maz@kernel.org>

On 09/06/21 12:23, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>> Implement initial support for KVM_{GET,SET}_SYSTEM_COUNTER_STATE ioctls
>> to migrate the value of CNTVOFF_EL2. These ioctls yield precise control
>> of the virtual counter-timers to userspace, allowing it to define its
>> own heuristics for managing vCPU offsets.
> I'm not really in favour of inventing a completely new API, for
> multiple reasons:
> 
> - CNTVOFF is an EL2 concept. I'd rather not expose it as such as it
>    becomes really confusing with NV (which does expose its own CNTVOFF
>    via the ONE_REG interface)
> 
> - You seem to allow each vcpu to get its own offset. I don't think
>    that's right. The architecture defines that all PEs have the same
>    view of the counters, and an EL1 guest should be given that
>    illusion.
> 
> - by having a parallel save/restore interface, you make it harder to
>    reason about what happens with concurrent calls to both interfaces
> 
> - the userspace API is already horribly bloated, and I'm not overly
>    keen on adding more if we can avoid it.
> 
> I'd rather you extend the current ONE_REG interface and make it modal,
> either allowing the restore of an absolute value or an offset for
> CNTVCT_EL0. This would also keep a consistent behaviour when restoring
> vcpus. The same logic would apply to the physical offset.

What about using KVM_GET/SET_DEVICE_ATTR?  It makes sense that the guest 
value for nested virt goes through ONE_REG, while the host value goes 
through DEVICE_ATTR.

Paolo

_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm

  parent reply	other threads:[~2021-06-10  6:26 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-06-08 21:47 [PATCH 00/10] KVM: Add idempotent controls for migrating system counter state Oliver Upton
2021-06-08 21:47 ` [PATCH 01/10] KVM: Introduce KVM_{GET, SET}_SYSTEM_COUNTER_STATE ioctls Oliver Upton
2021-06-08 21:47 ` [PATCH 02/10] KVM: arm64: Implement initial support for KVM_CAP_SYSTEM_COUNTER_STATE Oliver Upton
2021-06-08 21:55   ` Oliver Upton
2021-06-09 10:23   ` Marc Zyngier
2021-06-09 14:51     ` Oliver Upton
2021-06-10  6:54       ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-06-10  6:26     ` Paolo Bonzini [this message]
2021-06-08 21:47 ` [PATCH 03/10] selftests: KVM: Introduce system_counter_state_test Oliver Upton
2021-06-08 21:47 ` [PATCH 04/10] KVM: arm64: Add userspace control of the guest's physical counter Oliver Upton
2021-06-08 21:58   ` Oliver Upton
2021-06-08 21:47 ` [PATCH 05/10] selftests: KVM: Add test cases for physical counter offsetting Oliver Upton
2021-06-08 21:47 ` [PATCH 06/10] selftests: KVM: Add counter emulation benchmark Oliver Upton
2021-06-08 21:47 ` [PATCH 07/10] KVM: x86: Refactor tsc synchronization code Oliver Upton
2021-06-08 21:47 ` [PATCH 08/10] KVM: x86: Implement KVM_CAP_SYSTEM_COUNTER_STATE Oliver Upton
2021-06-08 21:47 ` [PATCH 09/10] selftests: KVM: Add support for x86 to system_counter_state_test Oliver Upton
2021-06-08 21:47 ` [PATCH 10/10] Documentation: KVM: Document KVM_{GET, SET}_SYSTEM_COUNTER_STATE ioctls Oliver Upton
2021-06-09 13:05 ` [PATCH 00/10] KVM: Add idempotent controls for migrating system counter state Paolo Bonzini
2021-06-09 15:11   ` Oliver Upton
2021-06-09 17:05     ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-06-09 22:04       ` Oliver Upton
2021-06-10  6:22         ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-06-10  6:53           ` Christian Borntraeger

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=9c5f19f9-b303-573a-aa2a-cf5a91110db8@redhat.com \
    --to=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    --cc=dmatlack@google.com \
    --cc=jmattson@google.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu \
    --cc=maz@kernel.org \
    --cc=oupton@google.com \
    --cc=pshier@google.com \
    --cc=rananta@google.com \
    --cc=seanjc@google.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