From: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
To: Hector Martin 'marcan' <marcan@marcan.st>
Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
Jing Zhang <jingzhangos@google.com>,
kernel-team@android.com, Srinivas Ramana <sramana@codeaurora.org>,
Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>,
David Brazdil <dbrazdil@google.com>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
Julien Thierry <julien.thierry.kdev@gmail.com>,
Ajay Patil <pajay@qti.qualcomm.com>,
Prasad Sodagudi <psodagud@codeaurora.org>,
Alexandru Elisei <alexandru.elisei@arm.com>,
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 05/21] arm64: Initialise as nVHE before switching to VHE
Date: Fri, 05 Feb 2021 14:04:28 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2f93bbfa7159f135252c6df870a652cc@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1dbffcd4-5b20-404c-94af-c985a96785e2@marcan.st>
Hi Hector,
On 2021-02-05 12:01, Hector Martin 'marcan' wrote:
> On 01/02/2021 20.56, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>> As we are aiming to be able to control whether we enable VHE or
>> not, let's always drop down to EL1 first, and only then upgrade
>> to VHE if at all possible.
>>
>> This means that if the kernel is booted at EL2, we always start
>> with a nVHE init, drop to EL1 to initialise the the kernel, and
>> only then upgrade the kernel EL to EL2 if possible (the process
>> is obviously shortened for secondary CPUs).
>
> Unfortunately, this is going to break on Apple SoCs, where it turns
> out HCR_EL2.E2H is hard-wired to 1 - there is no nVHE mode. :(
#facepalm
Thanks for the heads up. That's a blatant violation of the architecture,
as the only fixed value allowed is 0. I guess it was tempting for them
to ignore about half of the architecture... Oh well.
Here's a terrible hack on top of this series. It really doesn't
play nicely with the rest of the override stuff, but that's the
least of your worries at this stage. I've boot-tested it in a model
with E2H artificially forced, and nothing caught fire. YMMV.
It also means that if/when we merge the support for this CPU,
CONFIG_ARM64_VHE will becomes more or less mandatory...
Please let me know if this helps.
Thanks,
M.
diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/head.S b/arch/arm64/kernel/head.S
index 2e116ef255e1..bce66d6bda74 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/kernel/head.S
+++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/head.S
@@ -477,14 +477,13 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(kimage_vaddr)
* booted in EL1 or EL2 respectively.
*/
SYM_FUNC_START(init_kernel_el)
- mov_q x0, INIT_SCTLR_EL1_MMU_OFF
- msr sctlr_el1, x0
-
mrs x0, CurrentEL
cmp x0, #CurrentEL_EL2
b.eq init_el2
SYM_INNER_LABEL(init_el1, SYM_L_LOCAL)
+ mov_q x0, INIT_SCTLR_EL1_MMU_OFF
+ msr sctlr_el1, x0
isb
mov_q x0, INIT_PSTATE_EL1
msr spsr_el1, x0
@@ -504,6 +503,34 @@ SYM_INNER_LABEL(init_el2, SYM_L_LOCAL)
msr vbar_el2, x0
isb
+ /*
+ * Fruity CPUs seem to have HCR_EL2.E2H set to RES1,
+ * making it impossible to start in nVHE mode. Is that
+ * compliant with the architecture? Absolutely not!
+ */
+ mrs x0, hcr_el2
+ and x0, x0, #HCR_E2H
+ cbz x0, 1f
+
+ /* Switching to VHE requires a sane SCTLR_EL1 as a start */
+ mov_q x0, INIT_SCTLR_EL1_MMU_OFF
+ msr_s SYS_SCTLR_EL12, x0
+
+ /*
+ * Force an eret into a helper "function", and let it return
+ * to our original caller... This makes sure that we have
+ * initialised the basic PSTATE state.
+ */
+ mov x0, #INIT_PSTATE_EL2
+ msr spsr_el1, x0
+ adr_l x0, stick_to_vhe
+ msr elr_el1, x0
+ eret
+
+1:
+ mov_q x0, INIT_SCTLR_EL1_MMU_OFF
+ msr sctlr_el1, x0
+
msr elr_el2, lr
mov w0, #BOOT_CPU_MODE_EL2
eret
diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/hyp-stub.S b/arch/arm64/kernel/hyp-stub.S
index 3e08dcc924b5..109a555a1068 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/kernel/hyp-stub.S
+++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/hyp-stub.S
@@ -27,12 +27,12 @@ SYM_CODE_START(__hyp_stub_vectors)
ventry el2_fiq_invalid // FIQ EL2t
ventry el2_error_invalid // Error EL2t
- ventry el2_sync_invalid // Synchronous EL2h
+ ventry elx_sync // Synchronous EL2h
ventry el2_irq_invalid // IRQ EL2h
ventry el2_fiq_invalid // FIQ EL2h
ventry el2_error_invalid // Error EL2h
- ventry el1_sync // Synchronous 64-bit EL1
+ ventry elx_sync // Synchronous 64-bit EL1
ventry el1_irq_invalid // IRQ 64-bit EL1
ventry el1_fiq_invalid // FIQ 64-bit EL1
ventry el1_error_invalid // Error 64-bit EL1
@@ -45,7 +45,7 @@ SYM_CODE_END(__hyp_stub_vectors)
.align 11
-SYM_CODE_START_LOCAL(el1_sync)
+SYM_CODE_START_LOCAL(elx_sync)
cmp x0, #HVC_SET_VECTORS
b.ne 1f
msr vbar_el2, x1
@@ -71,7 +71,7 @@ SYM_CODE_START_LOCAL(el1_sync)
9: mov x0, xzr
eret
-SYM_CODE_END(el1_sync)
+SYM_CODE_END(elx_sync)
// nVHE? No way! Give me the real thing!
SYM_CODE_START_LOCAL(mutate_to_vhe)
@@ -227,3 +227,24 @@ SYM_FUNC_START(switch_to_vhe)
#endif
ret
SYM_FUNC_END(switch_to_vhe)
+
+SYM_FUNC_START(stick_to_vhe)
+ /*
+ * Make sure the switch to VHE cannot fail, by overriding the
+ * override. This is hilarious.
+ */
+ adr_l x1, id_aa64mmfr1_override
+ add x1, x1, #FTR_OVR_MASK_OFFSET
+ dc civac, x1
+ dsb sy
+ isb
+ ldr x0, [x1]
+ bic x0, x0, #(0xf << ID_AA64MMFR1_VHE_SHIFT)
+ str x0, [x1]
+
+ mov x0, #HVC_VHE_RESTART
+ hvc #0
+ mov x0, #BOOT_CPU_MODE_EL2
+ ret
+SYM_FUNC_END(stick_to_vhe)
+
--
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-02-05 14:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-02-01 11:56 [PATCH v6 00/21] arm64: Early CPU feature override, and applications to VHE, BTI and PAuth Marc Zyngier
2021-02-01 11:56 ` [PATCH v6 01/21] arm64: Fix labels in el2_setup macros Marc Zyngier
2021-02-01 11:56 ` [PATCH v6 02/21] arm64: Fix outdated TCR setup comment Marc Zyngier
2021-02-01 11:56 ` [PATCH v6 03/21] arm64: Turn the MMU-on sequence into a macro Marc Zyngier
2021-02-01 11:56 ` [PATCH v6 04/21] arm64: Provide an 'upgrade to VHE' stub hypercall Marc Zyngier
2021-02-01 11:56 ` [PATCH v6 05/21] arm64: Initialise as nVHE before switching to VHE Marc Zyngier
2021-02-05 12:01 ` Hector Martin 'marcan'
2021-02-05 14:04 ` Marc Zyngier [this message]
2021-02-06 14:29 ` Hector Martin 'marcan'
2021-02-01 11:56 ` [PATCH v6 06/21] arm64: Move VHE-specific SPE setup to mutate_to_vhe() Marc Zyngier
2021-02-03 21:13 ` Will Deacon
2021-02-04 9:30 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-02-04 9:34 ` Will Deacon
2021-02-04 9:50 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-02-01 11:56 ` [PATCH v6 07/21] arm64: Simplify init_el2_state to be non-VHE only Marc Zyngier
2021-02-01 11:56 ` [PATCH v6 08/21] arm64: Move SCTLR_EL1 initialisation to EL-agnostic code Marc Zyngier
2021-02-01 11:56 ` [PATCH v6 09/21] arm64: cpufeature: Add global feature override facility Marc Zyngier
2021-02-01 11:56 ` [PATCH v6 10/21] arm64: cpufeature: Use IDreg override in __read_sysreg_by_encoding() Marc Zyngier
2021-02-01 11:56 ` [PATCH v6 11/21] arm64: Extract early FDT mapping from kaslr_early_init() Marc Zyngier
2021-02-01 11:56 ` [PATCH v6 12/21] arm64: cpufeature: Add an early command-line cpufeature override facility Marc Zyngier
2021-02-05 16:35 ` Will Deacon
2021-02-05 16:42 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-02-01 11:56 ` [PATCH v6 13/21] arm64: Allow ID_AA64MMFR1_EL1.VH to be overridden from the command line Marc Zyngier
2021-02-01 11:56 ` [PATCH v6 14/21] arm64: Honor VHE being disabled from the command-line Marc Zyngier
2021-02-01 11:56 ` [PATCH v6 15/21] arm64: Add an aliasing facility for the idreg override Marc Zyngier
2021-02-01 11:56 ` [PATCH v6 16/21] arm64: Make kvm-arm.mode={nvhe, protected} an alias of id_aa64mmfr1.vh=0 Marc Zyngier
2021-02-01 11:56 ` [PATCH v6 17/21] KVM: arm64: Document HVC_VHE_RESTART stub hypercall Marc Zyngier
2021-02-01 11:56 ` [PATCH v6 18/21] arm64: Move "nokaslr" over to the early cpufeature infrastructure Marc Zyngier
2021-02-01 11:56 ` [PATCH v6 19/21] arm64: cpufeatures: Allow disabling of BTI from the command-line Marc Zyngier
2021-02-01 11:56 ` [PATCH v6 20/21] arm64: Defer enabling pointer authentication on boot core Marc Zyngier
2021-02-01 11:56 ` [PATCH v6 21/21] arm64: cpufeatures: Allow disabling of Pointer Auth from the command-line 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=2f93bbfa7159f135252c6df870a652cc@kernel.org \
--to=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=alexandru.elisei@arm.com \
--cc=ardb@kernel.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=dbrazdil@google.com \
--cc=james.morse@arm.com \
--cc=jingzhangos@google.com \
--cc=julien.thierry.kdev@gmail.com \
--cc=kernel-team@android.com \
--cc=kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=marcan@marcan.st \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=pajay@qti.qualcomm.com \
--cc=psodagud@codeaurora.org \
--cc=sramana@codeaurora.org \
--cc=suzuki.poulose@arm.com \
--cc=will@kernel.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).