From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from out-183.mta1.migadu.com (out-183.mta1.migadu.com [95.215.58.183]) (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 3757C14D6FB for ; Thu, 13 Jun 2024 22:30:24 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=95.215.58.183 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1718317827; cv=none; b=dX1YXFXHUWJehKUp9L/p1EoBlkFXlDzBrhxj4jqmTODkikZznhxhAtv8r2Mz40WO0j9jv7sduJxT50/7jvHjPMssKS1VfVe2NjVgGrHh0mUOupcOs9Lqd+ZNZqxq2IGKtSPQNw0Kj1lCuZshx8czCsIGS6CE2G3BAfQqkZ8w2CM= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1718317827; c=relaxed/simple; bh=WtLUY3gMVMTzsvduKOwbMoFtAc7ptyRvEHjh8N5faqQ=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=Ys60Wlb3p5vR2kq1/F8MPSpHTZBi8PSW42mHdgvhET5xnwmB4rt5t6PHcuWH7BJLmAYsevju2BAFljyh8UppdQs1XOFDi1A1tOpXLxDeqhNzR/ho3p8m4iyN3cMMduJzq6MgcReqfkSMVFQ2CjkKjp9jObOgo5MGG6nADN9YLLI= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.dev; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.dev; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.dev header.i=@linux.dev header.b=I8DqDQU6; arc=none smtp.client-ip=95.215.58.183 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.dev Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.dev Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.dev header.i=@linux.dev header.b="I8DqDQU6" X-Envelope-To: sebott@redhat.com DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.dev; s=key1; t=1718317823; 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: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=dNle85tnfECNbiSxlEDa4ToUm+q1l8NGFSjlQ5FgLMc=; b=I8DqDQU6s25I1HEdwsGKxf0jwRIok9IGiN/75kIktfKUDl64p/7eF0bYjQLmjU3vlSfTxD +RJ8a1fF3d29X9CdNgQKQiKeJWfoz3GLooySvmQzMca/yEUWMgpbdwjjodOS4mKCDfVHou ft3dBuo6zvZCMEaY2SbUV0G0IxQa8Kw= X-Envelope-To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Envelope-To: kvmarm@lists.linux.dev X-Envelope-To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org X-Envelope-To: maz@kernel.org X-Envelope-To: james.morse@arm.com X-Envelope-To: suzuki.poulose@arm.com X-Envelope-To: catalin.marinas@arm.com X-Envelope-To: will@kernel.org X-Envelope-To: shahuang@redhat.com X-Envelope-To: eric.auger@redhat.com Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2024 22:30:15 +0000 X-Report-Abuse: Please report any abuse attempt to abuse@migadu.com and include these headers. From: Oliver Upton To: Sebastian Ott Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, kvmarm@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Marc Zyngier , James Morse , Suzuki K Poulose , Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , Shaoqin Huang , Eric Auger Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 3/6] KVM: arm64: add emulation for CTR_EL0 register Message-ID: References: <20240603130507.17597-1-sebott@redhat.com> <20240603130507.17597-4-sebott@redhat.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_OUT On Thu, Jun 13, 2024 at 10:19:56PM +0000, Oliver Upton wrote: > Hi Sebastian, > > On Mon, Jun 03, 2024 at 03:05:04PM +0200, Sebastian Ott wrote: > > [...] > > > +static int validate_cache_topology(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 ctr_el0) > > +{ > > + const struct sys_reg_desc *clidr_el1; > > + unsigned int i; > > + int ret; > > + > > + clidr_el1 = get_sys_reg_desc(SYS_CLIDR_EL1); > > + if (!clidr_el1) > > + return -ENOENT; > > This doesn't actually matter if we agree on dropping the cross-checking, > but if this lookup fails it is 100% a KVM bug. Returning ENOENT isn't > exactly right here, since it gives userspace the impression that the > sysreg index it tried to access does not exist. > > So in the future it'd be good to return EINVAL in places where the > kernel did something stupid, probably with a warning for good measure. > > > +static int set_ctr(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, const struct sys_reg_desc *rd, > > + u64 val) > > +{ > > + u64 ctr, writable_mask = rd->val; > > + int ret = 0; > > + > > + mutex_lock(&vcpu->kvm->arch.config_lock); > > + ctr = vcpu->kvm->arch.ctr_el0; > > + if (val == ctr) > > + goto out_unlock; > > + > > + ret = -EBUSY; > > + if (kvm_vm_has_ran_once(vcpu->kvm)) > > + goto out_unlock; > > + > > + ret = -EINVAL; > > + if ((ctr & ~writable_mask) != (val & ~writable_mask)) > > + goto out_unlock; > > + > > + if (((ctr & CTR_EL0_DIC_MASK) < (val & CTR_EL0_DIC_MASK)) || > > + ((ctr & CTR_EL0_IDC_MASK) < (val & CTR_EL0_IDC_MASK)) || > > + ((ctr & CTR_EL0_DminLine_MASK) < (val & CTR_EL0_DminLine_MASK)) || > > + ((ctr & CTR_EL0_IminLine_MASK) < (val & CTR_EL0_IminLine_MASK))) { > > + goto out_unlock; > > I'd prefer if we addressed the issue w/ arm64_check_features() by making > CTR_EL0 behave like the other registers in the ID space instead of > open-coding these sorts of checks. > > I believe that can be accomplished by using kvm_read_sanitised_id_reg() > as the ::reset() function in the descriptor and initializing > kvm->arch.ctr_el0 in kvm_reset_id_regs(). Durr, I got rid of kvm_reset_id_regs() in commit 44cbe80b7616 ("KVM: arm64: Reset VM feature ID regs from kvm_reset_sys_regs()"), I should engage brain before responding. Adding a check for encoding == CTR_EL0 to is_vm_ftr_id_reg() seems to be the best way out. -- Thanks, Oliver