Re: [PATCH 7/9] KVM: arm64: PMU: Allow ID_AA64DFR0_EL1.PMUver to be set from userspace

[Reiji Watanabe <reijiw@google.com>]

Hi Marc,

On Fri, Aug 5, 2022 at 6:58 AM Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> Allow userspace to write ID_AA64DFR0_EL1, on the condition that only
> the PMUver field can be altered and be at most the one that was
> initially computed for the guest.
>
> Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
> ---
>  arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c | 35 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>  1 file changed, 34 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c
> index 55451f49017c..c0595f31dab8 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c
> @@ -1236,6 +1236,38 @@ static int set_id_aa64pfr0_el1(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
>         return 0;
>  }
>
> +static int set_id_aa64dfr0_el1(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
> +                              const struct sys_reg_desc *rd,
> +                              u64 val)

The function prototype doesn't appear to be right as the
set_user of sys_reg_desc().
---
[From sys_regs.h]
[sys_regs.h]
        int (*set_user)(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, const struct sys_reg_desc *rd,
                        const struct kvm_one_reg *reg, void __user *uaddr);
---

> +{
> +       u8 pmuver, host_pmuver;
> +
> +       host_pmuver = kvm_arm_pmu_get_host_pmuver();
> +
> +       /*
> +        * Allow AA64DFR0_EL1.PMUver to be set from userspace as long
> +        * as it doesn't promise more than what the HW gives us. We
> +        * don't allow an IMPDEF PMU though.
> +        */
> +       pmuver = FIELD_GET(ARM64_FEATURE_MASK(ID_AA64DFR0_PMUVER), val);
> +       if (pmuver == ID_AA64DFR0_PMUVER_IMP_DEF || pmuver > host_pmuver)
> +               return -EINVAL;

As mentioned in my comments for the patch-6, the vCPU's PMUVER could
currently be IMP_DEF.  So, with this IMP_DEF checking, a guest with
IMP_DEF PMU cannot be migrated to a newer KVM host.
Do we need to tolerate writes of IMP_DEF for compatibility ?

Oliver originally point this out for my ID register series, and
my V6 or newer series tried to not return an error for this by
ignoring the user requested IMP_DEF when PMU is not enabled for
the vCPU (Instead, the field is set to 0x0).

 https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220419065544.3616948-16-reijiw@google.com/

Thank you,
Reiji

> +
> +       /* We already have a PMU, don't try to disable it... */
> +       if (kvm_vcpu_has_pmu(vcpu) && pmuver == 0)
> +               return -EINVAL;
> +
> +       /* We can only differ with PMUver, and anything else is an error */
> +       val ^= read_id_reg(vcpu, rd, false);
> +       val &= ~(0xFUL << ID_AA64DFR0_PMUVER_SHIFT);
> +       if (val)
> +               return -EINVAL;
> +
> +       vcpu->kvm->arch.dfr0_pmuver = pmuver;
> +
> +       return 0;
> +}
> +
>  /*
>   * cpufeature ID register user accessors
>   *
> @@ -1510,7 +1542,8 @@ static const struct sys_reg_desc sys_reg_descs[] = {
>         ID_UNALLOCATED(4,7),
>
>         /* CRm=5 */
> -       ID_SANITISED(ID_AA64DFR0_EL1),
> +       { SYS_DESC(SYS_ID_AA64DFR0_EL1), .access = access_id_reg,
> +         .get_user = get_id_reg, .set_user = set_id_aa64dfr0_el1, },
>         ID_SANITISED(ID_AA64DFR1_EL1),
>         ID_UNALLOCATED(5,2),
>         ID_UNALLOCATED(5,3),
> --
> 2.34.1
>
> _______________________________________________
> kvmarm mailing list
> kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu
> https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel