linux-doc.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
	Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@linux.dev>,
	James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
	Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
	Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>, Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@arm.com>,
	kvmarm@lists.linux.dev, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 1/5] KVM: arm64: Share all userspace hardened thread data with the hypervisor
Date: Tue, 02 Apr 2024 15:53:33 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <86h6gju87m.wl-maz@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <fb54d7b0-9c83-4a0c-a08b-b722c9381ca7@sirena.org.uk>

On Tue, 02 Apr 2024 15:34:27 +0100,
Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org> wrote:
> 
> [1  <text/plain; us-ascii (quoted-printable)>]
> On Sun, Mar 31, 2024 at 11:00:41AM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> > Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org> wrote:
> 
> > > As part of the lazy FPSIMD state transitioning done by the hypervisor we
> > > currently share the userpsace FPSIMD state in thread->uw.fpsimd_state with
> > > the host. Since this struct is non-extensible userspace ABI we have to keep
> 
> > Using the same representation is just pure convenience, and nothing
> > requires us to use the it in the kernel/hypervisor.
> 
> Indeed, the additional data seemed contained enough that it was a
> reasonable tradeoff.
> 
> > > the definition as is but the addition of FPMR in the 2023 dpISA means that
> > > we will want to share more storage with the host. To facilitate this
> > > refactor the current code to share the entire thread->uw rather than just
> > > the one field.
> 
> > So this increase the required sharing with EL2 from 528 bytes to
> > 560. Not a huge deal, but definitely moving in the wrong direction. Is
> > there any plans to add more stuff to this structure that wouldn't be
> > *directly* relevant to the hypervisor?
> 
> I'm not aware of any current plans to extend this.
> 
> > > @@ -640,7 +641,7 @@ struct kvm_vcpu_arch {
> > >  	struct kvm_guest_debug_arch vcpu_debug_state;
> > >  	struct kvm_guest_debug_arch external_debug_state;
> > >  
> > > -	struct user_fpsimd_state *host_fpsimd_state;	/* hyp VA */
> > > +	struct thread_struct_uw *host_uw;	/* hyp VA */
> > >  	struct task_struct *parent_task;
> 
> > Well, this is going away, and you know it.
> 
> Sure, those patches are still in flight though.  It does seem reasonable
> to target the current code.

Sure, if your intent is for this code not to be merged.

Because it means this series assumes a different data life cycle, and
the review effort spent on it will be invalidated once you move to the
per-CPU state.

	M.

-- 
Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.

  reply	other threads:[~2024-04-02 14:53 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-03-29  0:13 [PATCH v6 0/5] KVM: arm64: Support for 2023 dpISA extensions Mark Brown
2024-03-29  0:13 ` [PATCH v6 1/5] KVM: arm64: Share all userspace hardened thread data with the hypervisor Mark Brown
2024-03-31 10:00   ` Marc Zyngier
2024-04-02 14:34     ` Mark Brown
2024-04-02 14:53       ` Marc Zyngier [this message]
2024-04-02 16:20         ` Mark Brown
2024-04-10  7:27           ` Marc Zyngier
2024-04-10 21:43             ` Mark Brown
2024-03-29  0:13 ` [PATCH v6 2/5] KVM: arm64: Add newly allocated ID registers to register descriptions Mark Brown
2024-03-31 10:59   ` Marc Zyngier
2024-04-02 17:21     ` Mark Brown
2024-04-10 10:32       ` Marc Zyngier
2024-04-10 16:33         ` Mark Brown
2024-03-29  0:13 ` [PATCH v6 3/5] KVM: arm64: Support FEAT_FPMR for guests Mark Brown
2024-03-29  0:13 ` [PATCH v6 4/5] KVM: arm64: selftests: Document feature registers added in 2023 extensions Mark Brown
2024-03-29  0:13 ` [PATCH v6 5/5] KVM: arm64: selftests: Teach get-reg-list about FPMR Mark Brown

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=86h6gju87m.wl-maz@kernel.org \
    --to=maz@kernel.org \
    --cc=Dave.Martin@arm.com \
    --cc=broonie@kernel.org \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=corbet@lwn.net \
    --cc=james.morse@arm.com \
    --cc=kvmarm@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=oliver.upton@linux.dev \
    --cc=shuah@kernel.org \
    --cc=suzuki.poulose@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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).