[RFC 06/55] KVM: arm64: Add EL2 execution context for nesting

Jintack Lim
2017-06-26T14:33:23Z

Hi Christoffer,

On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 6:10 AM, Christoffer Dall <cdall@linaro.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 09, 2017 at 01:24:02AM -0500, Jintack Lim wrote:
>> With the nested virtualization support, the context of the guest
>> includes EL2 register states. The host manages a set of virtual EL2
>> registers. In addition to that, the guest hypervisor supposed to run in
>> EL2 is now deprivilaged and runs in EL1. So, the host also manages a set
>> of shadow system registers to be able to run the guest hypervisor in
>> EL1.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jintack Lim <jintack@cs.columbia.edu>
>> Signed-off-by: Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@linaro.org>
>> ---
>> arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h | 54 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> 1 file changed, 54 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h
>> index c0c8b02..ed78d73 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h
>> @@ -146,6 +146,42 @@ enum vcpu_sysreg {
>> NR_SYS_REGS /* Nothing after this line! */
>> };
>>
>> +enum el2_regs {
>> + ELR_EL2,
>> + SPSR_EL2,
>> + SP_EL2,
>> + AMAIR_EL2,
>> + MAIR_EL2,
>> + TCR_EL2,
>> + TTBR0_EL2,
>> + VTCR_EL2,
>> + VTTBR_EL2,
>> + VMPIDR_EL2,
>> + VPIDR_EL2, /* 10 */
>> + MDCR_EL2,
>> + CNTHCTL_EL2,
>> + CNTHP_CTL_EL2,
>> + CNTHP_CVAL_EL2,
>> + CNTHP_TVAL_EL2,
>> + CNTVOFF_EL2,
>> + ACTLR_EL2,
>> + AFSR0_EL2,
>> + AFSR1_EL2,
>> + CPTR_EL2, /* 20 */
>> + ESR_EL2,
>> + FAR_EL2,
>> + HACR_EL2,
>> + HCR_EL2,
>> + HPFAR_EL2,
>> + HSTR_EL2,
>> + RMR_EL2,
>> + RVBAR_EL2,
>> + SCTLR_EL2,
>> + TPIDR_EL2, /* 30 */
>> + VBAR_EL2,
>> + NR_EL2_REGS /* Nothing after this line! */
>> +};
>
> Why do we have a separate enum and array for the EL2 regs and not simply
> expand vcpu_sysreg ?

We can expand vcpu_sysreg for the EL2 system registers. For SP_EL2,
SPSR_EL2, and ELR_EL2, where is the good place to locate them?.
SP_EL1, SPSR_EL1, and ELR_EL1 registers are saved in the kvm_regs
structure instead of sysregs[], so I wonder it's better to put them in
kvm_regs, too.

BTW, what's the reason that those EL1 registers are in kvm_regs
instead of sysregs[] in the first place?

>
>> +
>> /* 32bit mapping */
>> #define c0_MPIDR (MPIDR_EL1 * 2) /* MultiProcessor ID Register */
>> #define c0_CSSELR (CSSELR_EL1 * 2)/* Cache Size Selection Register */
>> @@ -193,6 +229,23 @@ struct kvm_cpu_context {
>> u64 sys_regs[NR_SYS_REGS];
>> u32 copro[NR_COPRO_REGS];
>> };
>> +
>> + u64 el2_regs[NR_EL2_REGS]; /* only used for nesting */
>> + u64 shadow_sys_regs[NR_SYS_REGS]; /* only used for virtual EL2 */
>> +
>> + /*
>> + * hw_* will be used when switching to a VM. They point to either
>> + * the virtual EL2 or EL1/EL0 context depending on vcpu mode.
>
> don't they either point to the shadow sys regs or the the normal EL1
> sysregs?

Ah, this is a general comment for all three members below.

>
>> + */
>> +
>> + /* pointing shadow_sys_regs or sys_regs */
>
> that's what this comment seems to indicate, so there's some duplicity
> here.

And this comment is for hw_sys_regs specifically.

>
>> + u64 *hw_sys_regs;
>> +
>> + /* copy of either gp_regs.sp_el1 or el2_regs[SP_EL2] */
>> + u64 hw_sp_el1;
>> +
>> + /* pstate written to SPSR_EL2 */
>> + u64 hw_pstate;
>> };
>>
>> typedef struct kvm_cpu_context kvm_cpu_context_t;
>> @@ -277,6 +330,7 @@ struct kvm_vcpu_arch {
>>
>> #define vcpu_gp_regs(v) (&(v)->arch.ctxt.gp_regs)
>> #define vcpu_sys_reg(v,r) ((v)->arch.ctxt.sys_regs[(r)])
>> +#define vcpu_el2_reg(v, r) ((v)->arch.ctxt.el2_regs[(r)])
>> /*
>> * CP14 and CP15 live in the same array, as they are backed by the
>> * same system registers.
>> --
>> 1.9.1
>>
>>
>