Path: csiph.com!aioe.org!bofh.it!news.nic.it!robomod From: Christoffer Dall Newsgroups: linux.kernel Subject: Re: [RFC 08/55] KVM: arm64: Set virtual EL2 context depending on the guest exception level Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2017 12:20:02 +0100 Message-ID: References: Dkim-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linaro.org; s=google; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=JkP9pqFrlSvNOkbGnvyXAv24lfkObC3YXWprC/W+mmI=; b=gHvaudQ/iap22EWBHHikqq6BFpY61klVcNu8ReIVAhQZWrN8PF/lJb25d84px3yOHT 83RTG5CqbP2EJhUZEzqsWbwT2/E1fSyXiBMfgYz7i7fTWjRKWkOgtfXWBSIEbB18dSE8 FtiCkRpEt+re28kf/DufpgvJfOcvZ7vlVW0B0= X-Google-Dkim-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=JkP9pqFrlSvNOkbGnvyXAv24lfkObC3YXWprC/W+mmI=; b=qmr/Ty8ctWe5GsdlXvuRbZjMV3tlrpvcW2og939sbQorkMcNRFICF3a4ZzPyOo32HV N9CVVbvVhZrKJhMaTOMEflRsSoBr4UyeSNO8eB0OhKr+VmnC/l5Hj+Oadm/MZPqrdfBR S2rniXZus4Bu7ovlfNTXZJddAaNN//0cjduUJ6kcRkMDFmwiSOSWpLE8g8Iu0paISZ9o nZvbKfIubADQESG4zGcn/ogiSn2jZtA3Y0AhBCPq/WSPCSlPezl6FO3gpCcLYCfydIIs 290gvUGIKgdVwH2OmLwohiqFLvH+8udSQnSgy8cDjzUju5o93IEkOWYF7YlxFJ69BmkL mVQA== X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39n0tV2VikTQuCLNmh6KF9BE3R6xhjxzR1EpeHgLoBbaitALcOxV7c2JvOcesHYwu574 X-Received: by 10.28.20.209 with SMTP id 200mr1966414wmu.64.1487762097919; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 03:14:57 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: robomod@news.nic.it List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Approved: robomod@news.nic.it Lines: 78 Organization: linux.* mail to news gateway X-Original-Cc: christoffer.dall@linaro.org, marc.zyngier@arm.com, pbonzini@redhat.com, rkrcmar@redhat.com, linux@armlinux.org.uk, catalin.marinas@arm.com, will.deacon@arm.com, vladimir.murzin@arm.com, suzuki.poulose@arm.com, mark.rutland@arm.com, james.morse@arm.com, lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com, kevin.brodsky@arm.com, wcohen@redhat.com, shankerd@codeaurora.org, geoff@infradead.org, andre.przywara@arm.com, eric.auger@redhat.com, anna-maria@linutronix.de, shihwei@cs.columbia.edu, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org X-Original-Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2017 12:14:45 +0100 X-Original-Message-ID: <20170222111445.GD26976@cbox> X-Original-References: <1483943091-1364-1-git-send-email-jintack@cs.columbia.edu> <1483943091-1364-9-git-send-email-jintack@cs.columbia.edu> X-Original-Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Xref: csiph.com linux.kernel:1586073 On Mon, Jan 09, 2017 at 01:24:04AM -0500, Jintack Lim wrote: > From: Christoffer Dall > > Set up virutal EL2 context to hardware if the guest exception level is > EL2. > > Signed-off-by: Christoffer Dall > Signed-off-by: Jintack Lim > --- > arch/arm64/kvm/context.c | 32 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++------ > 1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/context.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/context.c > index 320afc6..acb4b1e 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/context.c > +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/context.c > @@ -25,10 +25,25 @@ > void kvm_arm_setup_shadow_state(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > { > struct kvm_cpu_context *ctxt = &vcpu->arch.ctxt; > + if (unlikely(vcpu_mode_el2(vcpu))) { > + ctxt->hw_pstate = *vcpu_cpsr(vcpu) & ~PSR_MODE_MASK; > > - ctxt->hw_pstate = *vcpu_cpsr(vcpu); > - ctxt->hw_sys_regs = ctxt->sys_regs; > - ctxt->hw_sp_el1 = ctxt->gp_regs.sp_el1; > + /* > + * We emulate virtual EL2 mode in hardware EL1 mode using the > + * same stack pointer mode as the guest expects. > + */ I think this comment should either be deleted or explain why this works as opposed to stating the obvious. How about: /* * We can emulate the guest's configuration of which * stack pointer to use when executing in virtual EL2 by * using the equivalent feature in EL1 to point to * either the EL1 or EL0 stack pointer. */ > + if ((*vcpu_cpsr(vcpu) & PSR_MODE_MASK) == PSR_MODE_EL2h) > + ctxt->hw_pstate |= PSR_MODE_EL1h; > + else > + ctxt->hw_pstate |= PSR_MODE_EL1t; > + > + ctxt->hw_sys_regs = ctxt->shadow_sys_regs; > + ctxt->hw_sp_el1 = ctxt->el2_regs[SP_EL2]; > + } else { > + ctxt->hw_pstate = *vcpu_cpsr(vcpu); > + ctxt->hw_sys_regs = ctxt->sys_regs; > + ctxt->hw_sp_el1 = ctxt->gp_regs.sp_el1; > + } > } > > /** > @@ -38,9 +53,14 @@ void kvm_arm_setup_shadow_state(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > void kvm_arm_restore_shadow_state(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > { > struct kvm_cpu_context *ctxt = &vcpu->arch.ctxt; > - > - *vcpu_cpsr(vcpu) = ctxt->hw_pstate; > - ctxt->gp_regs.sp_el1 = ctxt->hw_sp_el1; > + if (unlikely(vcpu_mode_el2(vcpu))) { > + *vcpu_cpsr(vcpu) &= PSR_MODE_MASK; > + *vcpu_cpsr(vcpu) |= ctxt->hw_pstate & ~PSR_MODE_MASK; > + ctxt->el2_regs[SP_EL2] = ctxt->hw_sp_el1; > + } else { > + *vcpu_cpsr(vcpu) = ctxt->hw_pstate; > + ctxt->gp_regs.sp_el1 = ctxt->hw_sp_el1; > + } > } > > void kvm_arm_init_cpu_context(kvm_cpu_context_t *cpu_ctxt) > -- > 1.9.1 > >