From: will.deacon@arm.com (Will Deacon)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v2] arm64: KVM: pmu: Reset PMSELR_EL0.SEL to a sane value before entering the guest
Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2016 16:37:07 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20161206163706.GR2498@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20161206162918.GE4816@cbox>
On Tue, Dec 06, 2016 at 05:29:18PM +0100, Christoffer Dall wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 06, 2016 at 02:56:50PM +0000, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/switch.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/switch.c
> > index 83037cd..3b7cfbd 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/switch.c
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/switch.c
> > @@ -85,7 +85,13 @@ static void __hyp_text __activate_traps(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> > write_sysreg(val, hcr_el2);
> > /* Trap on AArch32 cp15 c15 accesses (EL1 or EL0) */
> > write_sysreg(1 << 15, hstr_el2);
> > - /* Make sure we trap PMU access from EL0 to EL2 */
> > + /*
> > + * Make sure we trap PMU access from EL0 to EL2. Also sanitize
> > + * PMSELR_EL0 to make sure it never contains the cycle
> > + * counter, which could make a PMXEVCNTR_EL0 access UNDEF.
> > + */
> > + if (vcpu->arch.mdcr_el2 & MDCR_EL2_HPMN_MASK)
> > + write_sysreg(0, pmselr_el0);
>
> I'm a bit confused about how we use the HPMN field. This value is
> always set to the full number of counters available on the system and
> never modified by the guest, right? So this is in essence a check that
> says 'do you have any performance counters, then make sure accesses
> don't undef to el1 instead of trapping to el2', but then my question is,
> why not just set pmselr_el0 to zero unconditionally, because in the case
> where (vcpu->arch.mdcr_el2 & MDCR_EL2_HPMN_MASK) == 0, it means we have
> no counters, which we'll have exposed to the guest anyhow, and we should
> undef at el1 in the guest, or did I get this completely wrong (like
> everything else today)?
I think Marc and I came to the same conclusion a few minutes ago. The check
you might want is "Have I instantiated a virtual PMU for this device?",
but that's probably a micro-optimisation.
Will
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-12-06 16:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-12-06 14:56 [PATCH v2] arm64: KVM: pmu: Reset PMSELR_EL0.SEL to a sane value before entering the guest Marc Zyngier
2016-12-06 15:27 ` Will Deacon
2016-12-06 15:42 ` Marc Zyngier
2016-12-06 16:29 ` Christoffer Dall
2016-12-06 16:37 ` Will Deacon [this message]
2016-12-06 17:17 ` Marc Zyngier
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=20161206163706.GR2498@arm.com \
--to=will.deacon@arm.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).