Re: [PATCH V3 10/14] arm64: nvhe: Allow TRBE access at EL1

Suzuki K Poulose
2021-01-28T09:50:03Z

On 1/28/21 9:46 AM, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On 2021-01-28 09:34, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
>> On 1/27/21 9:58 AM, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>>> On 2021-01-27 08:55, Anshuman Khandual wrote:
>>>> From: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
>>>>
>>>> When the kernel is booted at EL2 in a nvhe configuration,
>>>> enable the TRBE access to the EL1. The EL1 still can't trace
>>>> EL2, unless EL2 permits explicitly via TRFCR_EL2.E2TRE.
>>>>
>>>> Cc: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
>>>> Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
>>>> Cc: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
>>>> Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
>>>> cc: Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@arm.com>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@arm.com>
>>>
>>> Acked-by: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
>>>
>>> One comment below, though:
>>>
>>>> ---
>>>>  arch/arm64/include/asm/el2_setup.h | 19 +++++++++++++++++++
>>>>  arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_arm.h   |  2 ++
>>>>  2 files changed, 21 insertions(+)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/el2_setup.h
>>>> b/arch/arm64/include/asm/el2_setup.h
>>>> index a7f5a1b..05ecce9 100644
>>>> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/el2_setup.h
>>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/el2_setup.h
>>>> @@ -72,6 +72,25 @@
>>>>  .endif
>>>>
>>>>  3:
>>>> +
>>>> +.ifeqs    "\mode", "nvhe"
>>>> +    /*
>>>> +     * If the Trace Buffer is available, allow
>>>> +     * the EL1 to own it. Note that EL1 cannot
>>>> +     * trace the EL2, as it is prevented by
>>>> +     * TRFCR_EL2.E2TRE == 0.
>>>> +     */
>>>> +    ubfx    x0, x1, #ID_AA64DFR0_TRBE_SHIFT, #4
>>>> +    cbz    x0, 1f
>>>> +
>>>> +    mrs_s    x0, SYS_TRBIDR_EL1
>>>> +    and    x0, x0, TRBIDR_PROG
>>>> +    cbnz    x0, 1f
>>>> +    mov    x0, #(MDCR_EL2_E2TB_EL1_OWN << MDCR_EL2_E2TB_SHIFT)
>>>> +    orr    x2, x2, x0
>>>> +.endif
>>>> +
>>>> +1:
>>>
>>> Note that this will (badly) conflict with the late-VHE patches[1],
>>> where this code path has been reworked.
>>
>> Thanks for the heads up. We will need to see how things get merged.
>> Ideally this patch and the previous one (TRBE definitions could go
>> via the arm64 tree / kvm tree), in which case we could rebase these
>> two patches on the respective tree.
>
> I think the current plan of action is to go via the arm64 tree,
> given that there is nothing really KVM specific there. I'll respin
> the series one last (hopefully!) time on Monday. Let me know if
> you need a hand with the rebasing.

Sounds good, will rebase it on top of that then.

Cheers
Suzuki