From: "Alex Bennée" <alex.bennee@linaro.org>
To: Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@arm.com>
Cc: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>,
Okamoto Takayuki <tokamoto@jp.fujitsu.com>,
Christoffer Dall <cdall@kernel.org>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>,
Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
Zhang Lei <zhang.lei@jp.fujitsu.com>,
Julien Grall <julien.grall@arm.com>,
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 12/27] KVM: arm64/sve: System register context switch and access support
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2019 16:21:22 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87bm0vwhsd.fsf@zen.linaroharston> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1553864452-15080-13-git-send-email-Dave.Martin@arm.com>
Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@arm.com> writes:
> This patch adds the necessary support for context switching ZCR_EL1
> for each vcpu.
>
> ZCR_EL1 is trapped alongside the FPSIMD/SVE registers, so it makes
> sense for it to be handled as part of the guest FPSIMD/SVE context
> for context switch purposes instead of handling it as a general
> system register. This means that it can be switched in lazily at
> the appropriate time. No effort is made to track host context for
> this register, since SVE requires VHE: thus the hosts's value for
> this register lives permanently in ZCR_EL2 and does not alias the
> guest's value at any time.
>
> The Hyp switch and fpsimd context handling code is extended
> appropriately.
>
> Accessors are added in sys_regs.c to expose the SVE system
> registers and ID register fields. Because these need to be
> conditionally visible based on the guest configuration, they are
> implemented separately for now rather than by use of the generic
> system register helpers. This may be abstracted better later on
> when/if there are more features requiring this model.
>
> ID_AA64ZFR0_EL1 is RO-RAZ for MRS/MSR when SVE is disabled for the
> guest, but for compatibility with non-SVE aware KVM implementations
> the register should not be enumerated at all for KVM_GET_REG_LIST
> in this case. For consistency we also reject ioctl access to the
> register. This ensures that a non-SVE-enabled guest looks the same
> to userspace, irrespective of whether the kernel KVM implementation
> supports SVE.
>
> Signed-off-by: Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@arm.com>
> Reviewed-by: Julien Thierry <julien.thierry@arm.com>
> Tested-by: zhang.lei <zhang.lei@jp.fujitsu.com>
>
> ---
>
> Changes since v5:
>
> * Port to the renamed visibility() framework.
>
> * Swap visiblity() helpers so that they appear by the relevant accessor
> functions.
>
> * [Julien Grall] With the visibility() checks, {get,set}_zcr_el1()
> degenerate to doing exactly what the common code does, so drop them.
>
> The ID_AA64ZFR0_EL1 handlers are still needed to provide contitional
> RAZ behaviour. This could be moved to the common code too, but since
> this is a one-off case I don't do this for now. We can address this
> later if other regs need to follow the same pattern.
>
> * [Julien Thierry] Reset ZCR_EL1 to a fixed value using reset_val
> instead of using relying on reset_unknown() honouring set bits in val
> as RES0.
>
> Most of the bits in ZCR_EL1 are RES0 anyway, and many implementations
> of SVE will support larger vectors than 128 bits, so 0 seems as good
> a value as any to expose guests that forget to initialise this
> register properly.
> ---
> arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h | 1 +
> arch/arm64/include/asm/sysreg.h | 3 ++
> arch/arm64/kvm/fpsimd.c | 9 ++++-
> arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/switch.c | 3 ++
> arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c | 83 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
> 5 files changed, 93 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> index ad4f7f0..22cf484 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> @@ -121,6 +121,7 @@ enum vcpu_sysreg {
> SCTLR_EL1, /* System Control Register */
> ACTLR_EL1, /* Auxiliary Control Register */
> CPACR_EL1, /* Coprocessor Access Control */
> + ZCR_EL1, /* SVE Control */
> TTBR0_EL1, /* Translation Table Base Register 0 */
> TTBR1_EL1, /* Translation Table Base Register 1 */
> TCR_EL1, /* Translation Control Register */
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/sysreg.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/sysreg.h
> index 5b267de..4d6262d 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/sysreg.h
> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/sysreg.h
> @@ -454,6 +454,9 @@
> #define SYS_ICH_LR14_EL2 __SYS__LR8_EL2(6)
> #define SYS_ICH_LR15_EL2 __SYS__LR8_EL2(7)
>
> +/* VHE encodings for architectural EL0/1 system registers */
> +#define SYS_ZCR_EL12 sys_reg(3, 5, 1, 2, 0)
> +
> /* Common SCTLR_ELx flags. */
> #define SCTLR_ELx_DSSBS (_BITUL(44))
> #define SCTLR_ELx_ENIA (_BITUL(31))
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/fpsimd.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/fpsimd.c
> index 1cf4f02..7053bf4 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/fpsimd.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/fpsimd.c
> @@ -103,14 +103,21 @@ void kvm_arch_vcpu_ctxsync_fp(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> void kvm_arch_vcpu_put_fp(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> {
> unsigned long flags;
> + bool host_has_sve = system_supports_sve();
> + bool guest_has_sve = vcpu_has_sve(vcpu);
>
> local_irq_save(flags);
>
> if (vcpu->arch.flags & KVM_ARM64_FP_ENABLED) {
> + u64 *guest_zcr = &vcpu->arch.ctxt.sys_regs[ZCR_EL1];
> +
Is this just to avoid:
vcpu->arch.ctxt.sys_regs[ZCR_EL1] = read_sysreg_s(SYS_ZCR_EL12);
in fact wouldn't:
__vcpu_sys_reg(vcpu,ZCR_EL1) = read_sysreg_s(SYS_ZCR_EL12);
do?
> /* Clean guest FP state to memory and invalidate cpu view */
> fpsimd_save();
> fpsimd_flush_cpu_state();
> - } else if (system_supports_sve()) {
> +
> + if (guest_has_sve)
> + *guest_zcr = read_sysreg_s(SYS_ZCR_EL12);
> + } else if (host_has_sve) {
> /*
> * The FPSIMD/SVE state in the CPU has not been touched, and we
> * have SVE (and VHE): CPACR_EL1 (alias CPTR_EL2) has been
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/switch.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/switch.c
> index 3563fe6..9d46066 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/switch.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/switch.c
> @@ -351,6 +351,9 @@ static bool __hyp_text __hyp_switch_fpsimd(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>
> __fpsimd_restore_state(&vcpu->arch.ctxt.gp_regs.fp_regs);
>
> + if (vcpu_has_sve(vcpu))
> + write_sysreg_s(vcpu->arch.ctxt.sys_regs[ZCR_EL1], SYS_ZCR_EL12);
> +
__vcpu_sys_reg?
> /* Skip restoring fpexc32 for AArch64 guests */
> if (!(read_sysreg(hcr_el2) & HCR_RW))
> write_sysreg(vcpu->arch.ctxt.sys_regs[FPEXC32_EL2],
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c
> index c86a7b0..09e9b06 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c
> @@ -1051,10 +1051,7 @@ static u64 read_id_reg(const struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
> (u32)r->CRn, (u32)r->CRm, (u32)r->Op2);
> u64 val = raz ? 0 : read_sanitised_ftr_reg(id);
>
> - if (id == SYS_ID_AA64PFR0_EL1) {
> - if (val & (0xfUL << ID_AA64PFR0_SVE_SHIFT))
> - kvm_debug("SVE unsupported for guests, suppressing\n");
> -
> + if (id == SYS_ID_AA64PFR0_EL1 && !vcpu_has_sve(vcpu)) {
> val &= ~(0xfUL << ID_AA64PFR0_SVE_SHIFT);
> } else if (id == SYS_ID_AA64ISAR1_EL1) {
> const u64 ptrauth_mask = (0xfUL << ID_AA64ISAR1_APA_SHIFT) |
> @@ -1101,6 +1098,81 @@ static int reg_from_user(u64 *val, const void __user *uaddr, u64 id);
> static int reg_to_user(void __user *uaddr, const u64 *val, u64 id);
> static u64 sys_reg_to_index(const struct sys_reg_desc *reg);
>
> +/* Visibility overrides for SVE-specific control registers */
> +static unsigned int sve_visibility(const struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
> + const struct sys_reg_desc *rd)
> +{
> + if (vcpu_has_sve(vcpu))
> + return 0;
> +
> + return REG_HIDDEN_USER | REG_HIDDEN_GUEST;
> +}
> +
> +/* Visibility overrides for SVE-specific ID registers */
> +static unsigned int sve_id_visibility(const struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
> + const struct sys_reg_desc *rd)
> +{
> + if (vcpu_has_sve(vcpu))
> + return 0;
> +
> + return REG_HIDDEN_USER;
> +}
> +
> +/* Generate the emulated ID_AA64ZFR0_EL1 value exposed to the guest */
> +static u64 guest_id_aa64zfr0_el1(const struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> +{
> + if (!vcpu_has_sve(vcpu))
> + return 0;
> +
> + return read_sanitised_ftr_reg(SYS_ID_AA64ZFR0_EL1);
> +}
> +
> +static bool access_id_aa64zfr0_el1(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
> + struct sys_reg_params *p,
> + const struct sys_reg_desc *rd)
> +{
> + if (p->is_write)
> + return write_to_read_only(vcpu, p, rd);
> +
> + p->regval = guest_id_aa64zfr0_el1(vcpu);
> + return true;
> +}
> +
> +static int get_id_aa64zfr0_el1(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
> + const struct sys_reg_desc *rd,
> + const struct kvm_one_reg *reg, void __user *uaddr)
> +{
> + u64 val;
> +
> + if (!vcpu_has_sve(vcpu))
> + return -ENOENT;
> +
> + val = guest_id_aa64zfr0_el1(vcpu);
> + return reg_to_user(uaddr, &val, reg->id);
> +}
> +
> +static int set_id_aa64zfr0_el1(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
> + const struct sys_reg_desc *rd,
> + const struct kvm_one_reg *reg, void __user *uaddr)
> +{
> + const u64 id = sys_reg_to_index(rd);
> + int err;
> + u64 val;
> +
> + if (!vcpu_has_sve(vcpu))
> + return -ENOENT;
> +
> + err = reg_from_user(&val, uaddr, id);
> + if (err)
> + return err;
> +
> + /* This is what we mean by invariant: you can't change it. */
> + if (val != guest_id_aa64zfr0_el1(vcpu))
> + return -EINVAL;
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> /*
> * cpufeature ID register user accessors
> *
> @@ -1346,7 +1418,7 @@ static const struct sys_reg_desc sys_reg_descs[] = {
> ID_SANITISED(ID_AA64PFR1_EL1),
> ID_UNALLOCATED(4,2),
> ID_UNALLOCATED(4,3),
> - ID_UNALLOCATED(4,4),
> + { SYS_DESC(SYS_ID_AA64ZFR0_EL1), access_id_aa64zfr0_el1, .get_user = get_id_aa64zfr0_el1, .set_user = set_id_aa64zfr0_el1, .visibility = sve_id_visibility },
long line...
> ID_UNALLOCATED(4,5),
> ID_UNALLOCATED(4,6),
> ID_UNALLOCATED(4,7),
> @@ -1383,6 +1455,7 @@ static const struct sys_reg_desc sys_reg_descs[] = {
>
> { SYS_DESC(SYS_SCTLR_EL1), access_vm_reg, reset_val, SCTLR_EL1, 0x00C50078 },
> { SYS_DESC(SYS_CPACR_EL1), NULL, reset_val, CPACR_EL1, 0 },
> + { SYS_DESC(SYS_ZCR_EL1), NULL, reset_val, ZCR_EL1, 0, .visibility = sve_visibility },
> { SYS_DESC(SYS_TTBR0_EL1), access_vm_reg, reset_unknown, TTBR0_EL1 },
> { SYS_DESC(SYS_TTBR1_EL1), access_vm_reg, reset_unknown, TTBR1_EL1 },
> { SYS_DESC(SYS_TCR_EL1), access_vm_reg, reset_val, TCR_EL1, 0 },
Minor nits aside:
Reviewed-by: Alex Bennée <alex.bennee@linaro.org>
--
Alex Bennée
_______________________________________________
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:[~2019-04-24 15:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 109+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-03-29 13:00 [PATCH v7 00/27] KVM: arm64: SVE guest support Dave Martin
2019-03-29 13:00 ` [PATCH v7 01/27] KVM: Documentation: Document arm64 core registers in detail Dave Martin
2019-04-24 9:25 ` Alex Bennée
2019-03-29 13:00 ` [PATCH v7 02/27] arm64: fpsimd: Always set TIF_FOREIGN_FPSTATE on task state flush Dave Martin
2019-03-29 13:00 ` [PATCH v7 03/27] KVM: arm64: Delete orphaned declaration for __fpsimd_enabled() Dave Martin
2019-03-29 13:00 ` [PATCH v7 04/27] KVM: arm64: Refactor kvm_arm_num_regs() for easier maintenance Dave Martin
2019-03-29 13:00 ` [PATCH v7 05/27] KVM: arm64: Add missing #includes to kvm_host.h Dave Martin
2019-03-29 13:00 ` [PATCH v7 06/27] arm64/sve: Clarify role of the VQ map maintenance functions Dave Martin
2019-04-04 21:21 ` Andrew Jones
2019-03-29 13:00 ` [PATCH v7 07/27] arm64/sve: Check SVE virtualisability Dave Martin
2019-04-04 21:21 ` Andrew Jones
2019-04-05 9:35 ` Dave Martin
2019-03-29 13:00 ` [PATCH v7 08/27] arm64/sve: Enable SVE state tracking for non-task contexts Dave Martin
2019-03-29 13:00 ` [PATCH v7 09/27] KVM: arm64: Add a vcpu flag to control SVE visibility for the guest Dave Martin
2019-04-03 19:14 ` Andrew Jones
2019-04-04 3:17 ` Marc Zyngier
2019-04-04 7:53 ` Dave Martin
2019-04-04 21:15 ` Andrew Jones
2019-03-29 13:00 ` [PATCH v7 10/27] KVM: arm64: Propagate vcpu into read_id_reg() Dave Martin
2019-04-04 21:15 ` Andrew Jones
2019-03-29 13:00 ` [PATCH v7 11/27] KVM: arm64: Support runtime sysreg visibility filtering Dave Martin
2019-04-03 19:17 ` Andrew Jones
2019-04-24 9:39 ` Alex Bennée
2019-04-24 13:47 ` Dave Martin
2019-03-29 13:00 ` [PATCH v7 12/27] KVM: arm64/sve: System register context switch and access support Dave Martin
2019-04-03 19:39 ` Andrew Jones
2019-04-04 8:06 ` Dave Martin
2019-04-04 8:32 ` Andrew Jones
2019-04-04 8:47 ` Dave Martin
2019-04-04 8:59 ` Andrew Jones
2019-04-24 15:21 ` Alex Bennée [this message]
2019-04-25 13:28 ` Dave Martin
2019-03-29 13:00 ` [PATCH v7 13/27] KVM: arm64/sve: Context switch the SVE registers Dave Martin
2019-04-03 20:01 ` Andrew Jones
2019-04-04 8:10 ` Dave Martin
2019-04-04 8:35 ` Andrew Jones
2019-04-04 8:36 ` Dave Martin
2019-04-24 14:51 ` Alex Bennée
2019-04-25 13:35 ` Dave Martin
2019-03-29 13:00 ` [PATCH v7 14/27] KVM: Allow 2048-bit register access via ioctl interface Dave Martin
2019-04-04 21:11 ` Andrew Jones
2019-03-29 13:00 ` [PATCH v7 15/27] KVM: arm64: Add missing #include of <linux/string.h> in guest.c Dave Martin
2019-03-29 13:00 ` [PATCH v7 16/27] KVM: arm64: Factor out core register ID enumeration Dave Martin
2019-04-02 2:41 ` Marc Zyngier
2019-04-02 8:59 ` Dave Martin
2019-04-02 9:32 ` Marc Zyngier
2019-04-02 9:54 ` Dave P Martin
2019-03-29 13:00 ` [PATCH v7 17/27] KVM: arm64: Reject ioctl access to FPSIMD V-regs on SVE vcpus Dave Martin
2019-04-03 20:15 ` Andrew Jones
2019-04-24 13:45 ` Alex Bennée
2019-03-29 13:00 ` [PATCH v7 18/27] KVM: arm64/sve: Add SVE support to register access ioctl interface Dave Martin
2019-04-04 13:57 ` Andrew Jones
2019-04-04 14:50 ` Dave Martin
2019-04-04 16:25 ` Andrew Jones
2019-04-04 16:56 ` Dave Martin
2019-03-29 13:00 ` [PATCH v7 19/27] KVM: arm64: Enumerate SVE register indices for KVM_GET_REG_LIST Dave Martin
2019-04-04 14:08 ` Andrew Jones
2019-04-05 9:35 ` Dave Martin
2019-04-05 9:45 ` Andrew Jones
2019-04-05 11:11 ` Dave Martin
2019-03-29 13:00 ` [PATCH v7 20/27] arm64/sve: In-kernel vector length availability query interface Dave Martin
2019-04-04 14:20 ` Andrew Jones
2019-04-05 9:35 ` Dave Martin
2019-04-05 9:54 ` Andrew Jones
2019-04-05 11:13 ` Dave Martin
2019-03-29 13:00 ` [PATCH v7 21/27] KVM: arm/arm64: Add hook for arch-specific KVM initialisation Dave Martin
2019-04-04 14:25 ` Andrew Jones
2019-04-04 14:53 ` Dave Martin
2019-04-04 16:33 ` Andrew Jones
2019-04-05 9:36 ` Dave Martin
2019-04-05 10:40 ` Andrew Jones
2019-04-05 11:14 ` Dave Martin
2019-03-29 13:00 ` [PATCH v7 22/27] KVM: arm/arm64: Add KVM_ARM_VCPU_FINALIZE ioctl Dave Martin
2019-04-04 15:07 ` Andrew Jones
2019-04-04 16:47 ` Dave Martin
2019-03-29 13:00 ` [PATCH v7 23/27] KVM: arm64/sve: Add pseudo-register for the guest's vector lengths Dave Martin
2019-04-04 20:18 ` Andrew Jones
2019-04-05 9:36 ` Dave Martin
2019-04-05 10:14 ` Andrew Jones
2019-04-05 12:54 ` Dave Martin
2019-04-05 15:33 ` Andrew Jones
2019-04-10 12:42 ` Dave Martin
2019-04-04 20:31 ` Andrew Jones
2019-04-05 9:36 ` Dave Martin
2019-04-05 10:22 ` Andrew Jones
2019-04-05 14:06 ` Dave Martin
2019-04-05 15:41 ` Andrew Jones
2019-04-10 12:35 ` Dave Martin
2019-03-29 13:00 ` [PATCH v7 24/27] KVM: arm64/sve: Allow userspace to enable SVE for vcpus Dave Martin
2019-04-04 20:36 ` Andrew Jones
2019-03-29 13:00 ` [PATCH v7 25/27] KVM: arm64: Add a capability to advertise SVE support Dave Martin
2019-04-04 20:39 ` Andrew Jones
2019-03-29 13:00 ` [PATCH v7 26/27] KVM: Document errors for KVM_GET_ONE_REG and KVM_SET_ONE_REG Dave Martin
2019-04-03 20:27 ` Andrew Jones
2019-04-04 8:35 ` Dave Martin
2019-04-04 9:34 ` Andrew Jones
2019-04-04 9:38 ` Dave P Martin
2019-04-04 9:45 ` Andrew Jones
2019-03-29 13:00 ` [PATCH v7 27/27] KVM: arm64/sve: Document KVM API extensions for SVE Dave Martin
2019-04-04 21:09 ` Andrew Jones
2019-04-05 9:36 ` Dave Martin
2019-04-05 10:39 ` Andrew Jones
2019-04-05 13:00 ` Dave Martin
2019-04-05 15:38 ` Andrew Jones
2019-04-10 12:34 ` Dave Martin
2019-03-29 14:56 ` [PATCH v7 00/27] KVM: arm64: SVE guest support Marc Zyngier
2019-03-29 15:06 ` Dave Martin
2019-04-05 16:41 ` Dave Martin
2019-04-25 10:33 ` Alex Bennée
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=87bm0vwhsd.fsf@zen.linaroharston \
--to=alex.bennee@linaro.org \
--cc=Dave.Martin@arm.com \
--cc=ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=cdall@kernel.org \
--cc=julien.grall@arm.com \
--cc=kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=marc.zyngier@arm.com \
--cc=peter.maydell@linaro.org \
--cc=tokamoto@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=will.deacon@arm.com \
--cc=zhang.lei@jp.fujitsu.com \
/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