From: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
To: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, will@kernel.org, ardb@kernel.org,
lpieralisi@kernel.org, mark.rutland@arm.com,
steven.price@arm.com, aneesh.kumar@kernel.org,
sudeep.holla@arm.com, robh@kernel.org, maz@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 0/4] arm64: realm: Support for probing RSI earlier
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2026 15:51:28 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ef15fbdc-e48b-446c-9d5c-ff8d648d0f2c@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aiqYlCpuq3TongP8@arm.com>
On 11/06/2026 12:14, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> On Fri, May 29, 2026 at 01:27:01PM +0100, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
>> On 28/05/2026 17:06, Catalin Marinas wrote:
>>> On Tue, May 05, 2026 at 04:57:38PM +0100, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
>>>> This is an updated series, addressing the review comments from AI agent on
>>>> the version 1 [0] of the series, (some of which were documented as short comings).
>>>> See below for the changes.
>>>>
>>>> The Realm Guest linux support is broken without rodata=full (fortunately default
>>>> for arm64), as we detect the RSI support after we have created the Linear map
>>>> with Block/Contiguous mappings. If the boot CPU doesn't support BBML2_NOABORT
>>>> (there are CPUs out there with FEAT_RME and no - useable - BBML2_NOABORT)
>>>> we are then not able to split the page tables down to PTE level if the system
>>>> as such doesn't support BBML2.
>>>>
>>>> See the following link for the discussion.
>>>>
>>>> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260330161705.3349825-2-ryan.roberts@arm.com/
>>>>
>>>> The available options are :
>>>> 1. Start with PTE level mappings at paging_init() and then "FOLD" the page tables
>>>> to Block/Cont mappings after we have the full picture available. Looking at the
>>>> future (with BBML3), this might mean "additional work" for most of the systems
>>>> at boot. But not bad as splitting them ?
>>>> 2. Hold the secondary CPUs in busy loop with MMU disabled and split the mappings
>>>> by the boot CPU with MMU off (if Boot CPU can't support BBML2). This is tricky
>>>> with the page allocations required to add the page-tables.
>>>> 3. Move the detection of Realm support earlier to make a better decision for
>>>> paging_init(), with an added bonus of earlycon support for Realms without
>>>> the user having to work out the "top bit" for the Realm.
>>>>
>>>> This series is an attempt to implement (3) (without the earlycon support). We try
>>>> to probe the PSCI conduit early from the DT/ACPI. DT is not flattened at this time.
> [...]
>>> Could we instead add a more informative message in arm64_rsi_init() if
>>> !force_pte_mappings() && !cpu_supports_bbml2_noabort() (before
>>> is_realm_world() becomes true)? Well, it may not print anything if the
>>> early console is not set up yet.
>>
>> That is true, but with some expertise you may be able to enable earlycon
>> and may be we could get some new mechanism for "earlycon" for Realms.
>>
>> The other way to look at is:
>>
>> When the system doesn't support BBML2 Abort:
>>
>> Creating block/Cont mappings to start with and then splitting it to PTE
>> is quite difficult as we :
>> 1. Need to allocate pages for leaf level tables
>> 2. Hold the other CPUs in tight loop
>
> Agree, that's not easily possible at runtime.
>
>> Instead, creating the block/CONT levels from a fully "page level"
>> mappings are easier, as we can:
>>
>> 1. Can easily fold the tables to Block mapping with reclaiming the leaf
>> level pagetables.
>>
>> 2. Avoid the secondary CPUs dance, as they all support BBML2_NOABORT.
>>
>> This shouldn't be that bad as the opposite ?
>
> I don't think it solves our problem. Aren't we concerned with the
> rodata=off && !BBML2_NOABORT && is_realm_world() case? I don't think
> your second point stands.
>
> Currently we have:
>
> rodata=full && BBML2_NOABORT => block mappings irrespective of realms
>
> rodata=off && BBML2_NOABORT => block mappings first, can be split later
> if is_realm_world()
>
> rodata=off && !BBML2_NOABORT => block mappings first, serious problem if
> is_realm_world()
>
> It's the last case we need to fix. Starting with page mappings does
> avoid the in-realm failure but the !is_realm_world() case folding to
> block mappings still requires proper BBM.
I see, the case I was missing is : !is_realm_world() and !BBML2_NO_ABORT
and we want Block mapping if rodata=off. Yes, in this case we need the
secondaries on hold, with proper BBM on the boot CPU too. Again, it is
easier to "collapsing the tables to Block" than the reverse.
Suzuki
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-06-11 14:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-04-29 10:35 [RFC PATCH 0/4] arm64: realm: Support for probing RSI earlier Suzuki K Poulose
2026-04-29 10:35 ` [RFC PATCH 1/4] arm64: acpi: Refactor FADT table verification Suzuki K Poulose
2026-04-29 10:35 ` [RFC PATCH 2/4] psci: Add support for Early detection and init Suzuki K Poulose
2026-04-29 10:35 ` [RFC PATCH 3/4] arm64: psci: Move detection and SMCCC probe earlier Suzuki K Poulose
2026-04-29 10:35 ` [RFC PATCH 4/4] arm64: realm: Move RSI detection earlier Suzuki K Poulose
2026-05-05 15:57 ` [RFC PATCH v2 0/4] arm64: realm: Support for probing RSI earlier Suzuki K Poulose
2026-05-05 15:57 ` [RFC PATCH v2 1/4] arm64: acpi: Refactor FADT table verification Suzuki K Poulose
2026-05-05 15:57 ` [RFC PATCH v2 2/4] psci: Add support for Early detection and init Suzuki K Poulose
2026-05-05 15:57 ` [RFC PATCH v2 3/4] arm64: psci: Move detection and SMCCC probe earlier Suzuki K Poulose
2026-05-05 15:57 ` [RFC PATCH v2 4/4] arm64: realm: Move RSI detection earlier Suzuki K Poulose
2026-05-28 16:06 ` [RFC PATCH v2 0/4] arm64: realm: Support for probing RSI earlier Catalin Marinas
2026-05-29 12:27 ` Suzuki K Poulose
2026-06-11 11:14 ` Catalin Marinas
2026-06-11 14:51 ` Suzuki K Poulose [this message]
2026-05-08 8:09 ` [RFC PATCH " Lorenzo Pieralisi
2026-05-08 8:28 ` Suzuki K Poulose
2026-05-08 11:05 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2026-05-13 10:17 ` Suzuki K Poulose
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=ef15fbdc-e48b-446c-9d5c-ff8d648d0f2c@arm.com \
--to=suzuki.poulose@arm.com \
--cc=aneesh.kumar@kernel.org \
--cc=ardb@kernel.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lpieralisi@kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=robh@kernel.org \
--cc=steven.price@arm.com \
--cc=sudeep.holla@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