From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EFE26EEBA for ; Mon, 7 Oct 2024 23:32:01 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.133.124 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1728343924; cv=none; b=SM1aY8CS7ISn022/XuOoX0FyFWitjQ3+iuGgG1bHE8cgFAcXbrTagkC7E3KyHEJpTqX8DQlPr7eG9PwjXIH54zEDF7b2V3VNoxTl88WdBSG1I2XD6O+ASP+GcTht2TIgNPb3rE0ppv9/W8BwQgDzso1qH6cKryp8wRQ9S1kZocg= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1728343924; c=relaxed/simple; bh=Ht1Yy0iypTEXR9ooaGcICtut0Uoo+ne0wlENoJN2QuA=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=ZGN/lXuVTNXgZL64uRRg/i8xDHOnYwl0ZEG9WyzJj3xsoOfIGvix3EFfLp4jTsqcMocuOXMx0gDJPDVGG99viu+MEQ4/b8WxExu4DA28XtxZB8yJtWnXKzauGBKa2WFB33b8//p2TFR1aVYpKuKQZgD4gFYkVEanwr0/T4sPgOY= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b=dn2dUekK; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.133.124 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="dn2dUekK" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1728343920; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=xn5VipfFAx/hyoeUIyAKV9cybG6lqWlq3DSCdiVR8XQ=; b=dn2dUekK/1P2lVovucHldZo3W1w63jD3QfYp72l/TPBuWKvtKFKGEuDlZxnQmwBB7571w3 +PmWA9ypcuejOJgOaGvPrDZgLcbwFgrjUCh5Guos+/vaNWjKTMMLO7mWRBKK3ImXTdLbZ3 BF93LxJDUM1YF05wprCeAUd9BNuRjHo= Received: from mail-pl1-f200.google.com (mail-pl1-f200.google.com [209.85.214.200]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-544-90FtsoRpPMuCcoNnnqGM1w-1; Mon, 07 Oct 2024 19:31:59 -0400 X-MC-Unique: 90FtsoRpPMuCcoNnnqGM1w-1 Received: by mail-pl1-f200.google.com with SMTP id d9443c01a7336-207510f3242so64680495ad.0 for ; Mon, 07 Oct 2024 16:31:59 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1728343919; x=1728948719; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:content-language :references:cc:to:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=xn5VipfFAx/hyoeUIyAKV9cybG6lqWlq3DSCdiVR8XQ=; b=u+MhKw3E7Hs0CRD15ksmglYvr5mceA21NNicCXYX1IbUCPAcbv995hYUPk7sEdsn7H F729R8e6YUxm73KqBQ+dIvzfyyK5G5mJnVdbiKUZZpNuqAquEOb6Fq2J+QqXc31p8vF6 edTIAP5heTCF4Kcddg2ofnvQ/3NiiL+Au3Qrfx17kBRVGhCbUlONrRi6jOBDQZ5+KQt6 w+iX/XvEdvN7os56wWe16RvojoEf3HgfjD1u/wKRTvO5KmKUeYa3CG3J1s+ZKQnqwevt wnm4Sag80i6Xq3FxTdt3AvJK+IJHPXvgxk+JPtQ1H39rE2aXZGoaUAkePwtJRTqYP/rI MRRQ== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCWwfSBxk5gt5nPTvvt4GIDDQnCI9BR+Waf4JGVCP9hMmOdAe5KBcuh+5UBUEkiQbzAzdvTYzMCgFsC2@lists.linux.dev X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YwweGXM7jDLfF1vt4/IrmY4forJnj6GNaI6RhTIuOloM4is58kC FoIt2M9vovAhOpFTEAdJW4C1JqOgNO8SXSz/VpExFGA0G/DD4SOn/p3ChGez9dbRDOKiH+eziN3 vJyiIrpxqpfC2KzMZoL8U8qPyMHKLXI2Jb0UibxVZ4jzu5i7qwxU7L4wpDkg= X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:e94e:b0:20b:ce4e:b9e4 with SMTP id d9443c01a7336-20bfe044af6mr203338225ad.29.1728343918761; Mon, 07 Oct 2024 16:31:58 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IG1W8ebPVGuqJ+AYS94dnhWBYhQJ4Y/2xEe8XcKTYkZf8a1TIxLuURCjOjtoXj9xhC2Yn9qpA== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:e94e:b0:20b:ce4e:b9e4 with SMTP id d9443c01a7336-20bfe044af6mr203337805ad.29.1728343918380; Mon, 07 Oct 2024 16:31:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.68.54] ([103.210.27.132]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id d9443c01a7336-20c1395dc41sm44463875ad.217.2024.10.07.16.31.51 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 07 Oct 2024 16:31:57 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <8a8ad27f-dc8f-4d44-bb35-67fd1133afbb@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2024 09:31:49 +1000 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-coco@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 02/11] arm64: Detect if in a realm and set RIPAS RAM To: Steven Price , kvm@vger.kernel.org, kvmarm@lists.linux.dev Cc: Suzuki K Poulose , Catalin Marinas , Marc Zyngier , Will Deacon , James Morse , Oliver Upton , Zenghui Yu , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Joey Gouly , Alexandru Elisei , Christoffer Dall , Fuad Tabba , linux-coco@lists.linux.dev, Ganapatrao Kulkarni , Shanker Donthineni , Alper Gun , "Aneesh Kumar K . V" References: <20241004144307.66199-1-steven.price@arm.com> <20241004144307.66199-3-steven.price@arm.com> From: Gavin Shan In-Reply-To: <20241004144307.66199-3-steven.price@arm.com> X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Language: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 10/5/24 12:42 AM, Steven Price wrote: > From: Suzuki K Poulose > > Detect that the VM is a realm guest by the presence of the RSI > interface. This is done after PSCI has been initialised so that we can > check the SMCCC conduit before making any RSI calls. > > If in a realm then all memory needs to be marked as RIPAS RAM initially, > the loader may or may not have done this for us. To be sure iterate over > all RAM and mark it as such. Any failure is fatal as that implies the > RAM regions passed to Linux are incorrect - which would mean failing > later when attempting to access non-existent RAM. > > Signed-off-by: Suzuki K Poulose > Co-developed-by: Steven Price > Signed-off-by: Steven Price > --- > Changes since v5: > * Replace BUG_ON() with a panic() call that provides a message with the > memory range that couldn't be set to RIPAS_RAM. > * Move the call to arm64_rsi_init() later so that it is after PSCI, > this means we can use arm_smccc_1_1_get_conduit() to check if it is > safe to make RSI calls. > Changes since v4: > * Minor tidy ups. > Changes since v3: > * Provide safe/unsafe versions for converting memory to protected, > using the safer version only for the early boot. > * Use the new psci_early_test_conduit() function to avoid calling an > SMC if EL3 is not present (or not configured to handle an SMC). > Changes since v2: > * Use DECLARE_STATIC_KEY_FALSE rather than "extern struct > static_key_false". > * Rename set_memory_range() to rsi_set_memory_range(). > * Downgrade some BUG()s to WARN()s and handle the condition by > propagating up the stack. Comment the remaining case that ends in a > BUG() to explain why. > * Rely on the return from rsi_request_version() rather than checking > the version the RMM claims to support. > * Rename the generic sounding arm64_setup_memory() to > arm64_rsi_setup_memory() and move the call site to setup_arch(). > --- > arch/arm64/include/asm/rsi.h | 66 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > arch/arm64/kernel/Makefile | 3 +- > arch/arm64/kernel/rsi.c | 75 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > arch/arm64/kernel/setup.c | 3 ++ > 4 files changed, 146 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > create mode 100644 arch/arm64/include/asm/rsi.h > create mode 100644 arch/arm64/kernel/rsi.c > Two nitpicks below. Reviewed-by: Gavin Shan > diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/rsi.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/rsi.h > new file mode 100644 > index 000000000000..e4c01796c618 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/rsi.h > @@ -0,0 +1,66 @@ > +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only */ > +/* > + * Copyright (C) 2024 ARM Ltd. > + */ > + > +#ifndef __ASM_RSI_H_ > +#define __ASM_RSI_H_ > + > +#include > +#include > +#include > + > +DECLARE_STATIC_KEY_FALSE(rsi_present); > + > +void __init arm64_rsi_init(void); > + > +static inline bool is_realm_world(void) > +{ > + return static_branch_unlikely(&rsi_present); > +} > + > +static inline int rsi_set_memory_range(phys_addr_t start, phys_addr_t end, > + enum ripas state, unsigned long flags) > +{ > + unsigned long ret; > + phys_addr_t top; > + > + while (start != end) { > + ret = rsi_set_addr_range_state(start, end, state, flags, &top); > + if (WARN_ON(ret || top < start || top > end)) > + return -EINVAL; > + start = top; > + } > + > + return 0; > +} > + The WARN_ON() is redundant when the caller is arm64_rsi_setup_memory(), where system panic is invoked on any errors. So we perhaps need to drop the WARN_ON(). [...] > + > +static void __init arm64_rsi_setup_memory(void) > +{ > + u64 i; > + phys_addr_t start, end; > + > + /* > + * Iterate over the available memory ranges and convert the state to > + * protected memory. We should take extra care to ensure that we DO NOT > + * permit any "DESTROYED" pages to be converted to "RAM". > + * > + * panic() is used because if the attempt to switch the memory to > + * protected has failed here, then future accesses to the memory are > + * simply going to be reflected as a SEA (Synchronous External Abort) > + * which we can't handle. Bailing out early prevents the guest limping > + * on and dying later. > + */ > + for_each_mem_range(i, &start, &end) { > + if (rsi_set_memory_range_protected_safe(start, end)) > + panic("Failed to set memory range to protected: %pa-%pa", > + &start, &end); > + } > +} > + {} is needed since the panic statement spans multiple lines. Thanks, Gavin