[PATCH 7/8] arm64/kexec: Add checks for KVM

AKASHI Takahiro
2015-01-30T06:10:53Z

Hello Marc, Mark

Thank you for your useful comments.
I need to look at Marc's commit(5a677ce044f) more carefully
about trampoline code.

On 01/30/2015 03:47 AM, Mark Rutland wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 10:59:45AM +0000, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>>
>> On 29/01/15 09:57, AKASHI Takahiro wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> On 01/27/2015 04:19 AM, Mark Rutland wrote:
>>>> On Sat, Jan 17, 2015 at 12:23:34AM +0000, Geoff Levand wrote:
>>>>> Add runtime checks that fail the arm64 kexec syscall for situations that would
>>>>> result in system instability do to problems in the KVM kernel support.
>>>>> These checks should be removed when the KVM problems are resolved fixed.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Geoff Levand <geoff@infradead.org>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> arch/arm64/kernel/machine_kexec.c | 10 ++++++++++
>>>>> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/machine_kexec.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/machine_kexec.c
>>>>> index 3d84759..a36459d 100644
>>>>> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/machine_kexec.c
>>>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/machine_kexec.c
>>>>> @@ -16,6 +16,9 @@
>>>>> #include <asm/cacheflush.h>
>>>>> #include <asm/system_misc.h>
>>>>>
>>>>> +/* TODO: Remove this include when KVM can support a kexec reboot. */
>>>>> +#include <asm/virt.h>
>>>>> +
>>>>> /* Global variables for the relocate_kernel routine. */
>>>>> extern const unsigned char relocate_new_kernel[];
>>>>> extern const unsigned long relocate_new_kernel_size;
>>>>> @@ -100,6 +103,13 @@ int machine_kexec_prepare(struct kimage *image)
>>>>>
>>>>> kexec_image_info(image);
>>>>>
>>>>> + /* TODO: Remove this message when KVM can support a kexec reboot. */
>>>>> + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_KVM) && is_hyp_mode_available()) {
>>>>> + pr_err("%s: Your kernel is configured with KVM support (CONFIG_KVM=y) which currently does not allow for kexec re-boot.\n",
>>>>> + __func__);
>>>>> + return -ENOSYS;
>>>>> + }
>>>>
>>>> If you really don't want to implement KVM teardown, surely this should
>>>> be at the start of the series, so we don't have a point in the middle
>>>> where things may explode in this case?
>>>
>>> I'm going to fix this KVM issue (teardown) in cooperation with Geoff.
>>>
>>> Looking into kvm init code, kvm_arch_init() in particular,
>>> I guess that teardown function (kvm_arch_exit()) should do
>>> (reverting kvm_timer_hyp_init() per cpu)
>>> - stop arch timer
>>
>> No need, there shouldn't be any guest running at that point.
>>
>>> (reverting cpu_init_hyp_mode() per cpu)
>>> - flush TLB
>>> - jump into identical mapping (using boot_hyp_pgd?)
>>> - disable MMU?
>>
>> Yes, and for that, you need to go back to an idmap
>>
>>> - restore vbar_el2 to __hyp_stub_vectors (or NULL?)
>>
>> It doesn't matter, you want to stay in HYP for the next kernel.
>
> Well, it depends on how the teardown is implemented. I'd imagined we'd
> have KVM tear itself down (restoring the hyp stub) as part of shut down.
> Later kexec/soft_restart would call the stub to get back to EL2.
>
> That way kexec doesn't need to know anything about KVM, and it has one
> path that works regardless of whether KVM is compiled into the kernel.

Initially, I thought that we would define kvm_arch_exit() and call it
somewhere in the middle of kexec path (no idea yet).
But Geoff suggested me to implement a new hvc call, HVC_CPU_SHUTDOWN(??),
and make it called via cpu_notifier(CPU_DYING_FROZEN) initiated by
machine_shutdown() from kernel_kexec().
(As you know, a hook is already there for cpu online in kvm/arm.c.)

Is this the right place to put teardown function?
(I'm not sure if this hook will be called also on a boot cpu.)

Thanks,
-Takahiro AKASHI

> Mark.
>