From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: christoffer.dall@linaro.org (Christoffer Dall) Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2014 06:59:27 -0800 Subject: [PATCH v2] arm/arm64: KVM: detect CPU reset on CPU_PM_EXIT In-Reply-To: <530C69A8.20800@arm.com> References: <1392983216-368-1-git-send-email-marc.zyngier@arm.com> <20140221171216.GA22447@cbox> <530C69A8.20800@arm.com> Message-ID: <20140225145927.GD22447@cbox> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 10:00:08AM +0000, Marc Zyngier wrote: > On 21/02/14 17:12, Christoffer Dall wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 11:46:56AM +0000, Marc Zyngier wrote: > >> Commit 1fcf7ce0c602 (arm: kvm: implement CPU PM notifier) added > >> support for CPU power-management, using a cpu_notifier to re-init > >> KVM on a CPU that entered CPU idle. > >> > >> The code assumed that a CPU entering idle would actually be powered > >> off, loosing its state entierely, and would then need to be > >> reinitialized. It turns out that this is not always the case, and > >> some HW performs CPU PM without actually killing the core. In this > >> case, we try to reinitialize KVM while it is still live. It ends up > >> badly, as reported by Andre Przywara (using a Calxeda Midway): > >> > >> [ 3.663897] Kernel panic - not syncing: unexpected prefetch abort in Hyp mode at: 0x685760 > >> [ 3.663897] unexpected data abort in Hyp mode at: 0xc067d150 > >> [ 3.663897] unexpected HVC/SVC trap in Hyp mode at: 0xc0901dd0 > >> > >> The trick here is to detect if we've been through a full re-init or > >> not by looking at HVBAR (VBAR_EL2 on arm64). This involves > >> implementing the backend for __hyp_get_vectors in the main KVM HYP > >> code (rather small), and checking the return value against the > >> default one when the CPU notifier is called on CPU_PM_EXIT. > >> > >> Reported-by: Andre Przywara > >> Tested-by: Andre Przywara > >> Cc: Lorenzo Pieralisi > >> Cc: Rob Herring > >> Acked-by: Christoffer Dall > >> Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier > > > > Thanks! > > > > Looks good. > > Thanks. I'm thinking of pushing this to 3.14 as a fix. Any objection? > Nope, go for it. -Christoffer