Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > linux.kernel > #1323128 > unrolled thread

Re: [PATCH v2 08/21] arm64: KVM: VHE: Introduce unified system register accessors

Started byChristoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@linaro.org>
First post2016-02-01 14:50 +0100
Last post2016-02-01 16:50 +0100
Articles 3 — 2 participants

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.


Contents

  Re: [PATCH v2 08/21] arm64: KVM: VHE: Introduce unified system  register accessors Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@linaro.org> - 2016-02-01 14:50 +0100
    Re: [PATCH v2 08/21] arm64: KVM: VHE: Introduce unified system  register accessors Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com> - 2016-02-01 15:10 +0100
      Re: [PATCH v2 08/21] arm64: KVM: VHE: Introduce unified system  register accessors Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@linaro.org> - 2016-02-01 16:50 +0100

#1323128 — Re: [PATCH v2 08/21] arm64: KVM: VHE: Introduce unified system register accessors

FromChristoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@linaro.org>
Date2016-02-01 14:50 +0100
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 08/21] arm64: KVM: VHE: Introduce unified system register accessors
Message-ID<qXn1E-3zn-17@gated-at.bofh.it>
On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 03:53:42PM +0000, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> VHE brings its own bag of new system registers, or rather system
> register accessors, as it define new ways to access both guest
> and host system registers. For example, from the host:
> 
> - The host TCR_EL2 register is accessed using the TCR_EL1 accessor
> - The guest TCR_EL1 register is accessed using the TCR_EL12 accessor
> 
> Obviously, this is confusing. A way to somehow reduce the complexity
> of writing code for both ARMv8 and ARMv8.1 is to use a set of unified
> accessors that will generate the right sysreg, depending on the mode
> the CPU is running in. For example:
> 
> - read_sysreg_el1(tcr) will use TCR_EL1 on ARMv8, and TCR_EL12 on
>   ARMv8.1 with VHE.
> - read_sysreg_el2(tcr) will use TCR_EL2 on ARMv8, and TCR_EL1 on
>   ARMv8.1 with VHE.
> 
> We end up with three sets of accessors ({read,write}_sysreg_el[012])
> that can be directly used from C code. We take this opportunity to
> also add the definition for the new VHE sysregs.(

weird closing parenthesis.

> 
> Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>
> ---
>  arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/hyp.h | 72 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 72 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/hyp.h b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/hyp.h
> index fc502f3..744c919 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/hyp.h
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/hyp.h
> @@ -48,6 +48,78 @@ static inline unsigned long __hyp_kern_va(unsigned long v)
>  
>  #define hyp_kern_va(v) (typeof(v))(__hyp_kern_va((unsigned long)(v)))
>  
> +#define read_sysreg_elx(r,nvh,vh)					\
> +	({								\
> +		u64 reg;						\
> +		asm volatile(ALTERNATIVE("mrs %0, " __stringify(r##nvh),\
> +					 "mrs_s %0, " __stringify(r##vh),\
> +					 ARM64_HAS_VIRT_HOST_EXTN)	\
> +			     : "=r" (reg));				\
> +		reg;							\
> +	})
> +
> +#define write_sysreg_elx(v,r,nvh,vh)					\
> +	do {								\
> +		u64 __val = (u64)(v);					\
> +		asm volatile(ALTERNATIVE("msr " __stringify(r##nvh) ", %x0",\
> +					 "msr_s " __stringify(r##vh) ", %x0",\
> +					 ARM64_HAS_VIRT_HOST_EXTN)	\
> +					 : : "rZ" (__val));		\

what is rZ ?
(complete Google-fu failure misery)

> +	} while (0)
> +
> +/*
> + * Unified accessors for registers that have a different encoding
> + * between VHE and non-VHE. They must be specified without their "ELx"
> + * encoding.
> + */
> +#define read_sysreg_el2(r)						\
> +	({								\
> +		u64 reg;						\
> +		asm volatile(ALTERNATIVE("mrs %0, " __stringify(r##_EL2),\
> +					 "mrs %0, " __stringify(r##_EL1),\
> +					 ARM64_HAS_VIRT_HOST_EXTN)	\
> +			     : "=r" (reg));				\
> +		reg;							\
> +	})
> +
> +#define write_sysreg_el2(v,r)						\
> +	do {								\
> +		u64 __val = (u64)(v);					\
> +		asm volatile(ALTERNATIVE("msr " __stringify(r##_EL2) ", %x0",\
> +					 "msr " __stringify(r##_EL1) ", %x0",\
> +					 ARM64_HAS_VIRT_HOST_EXTN)	\
> +					 : : "rZ" (__val));		\
> +	} while (0)
> +
> +#define read_sysreg_el0(r)	read_sysreg_elx(r, _EL0, _EL02)
> +#define write_sysreg_el0(v,r)	write_sysreg_elx(v, r, _EL0, _EL02)
> +#define read_sysreg_el1(r)	read_sysreg_elx(r, _EL1, _EL12)
> +#define write_sysreg_el1(v,r)	write_sysreg_elx(v, r, _EL1, _EL12)
> +
> +/* The VHE specific system registers and their encoding */
> +#define sctlr_EL12              sys_reg(3, 5, 1, 0, 0)
> +#define cpacr_EL12              sys_reg(3, 5, 1, 0, 2)
> +#define ttbr0_EL12              sys_reg(3, 5, 2, 0, 0)
> +#define ttbr1_EL12              sys_reg(3, 5, 2, 0, 1)
> +#define tcr_EL12                sys_reg(3, 5, 2, 0, 2)
> +#define afsr0_EL12              sys_reg(3, 5, 5, 1, 0)
> +#define afsr1_EL12              sys_reg(3, 5, 5, 1, 1)
> +#define esr_EL12                sys_reg(3, 5, 5, 2, 0)
> +#define far_EL12                sys_reg(3, 5, 6, 0, 0)
> +#define mair_EL12               sys_reg(3, 5, 10, 2, 0)
> +#define amair_EL12              sys_reg(3, 5, 10, 3, 0)
> +#define vbar_EL12               sys_reg(3, 5, 12, 0, 0)
> +#define contextidr_EL12         sys_reg(3, 5, 13, 0, 1)
> +#define cntkctl_EL12            sys_reg(3, 5, 14, 1, 0)
> +#define cntp_tval_EL02          sys_reg(3, 5, 14, 2, 0)
> +#define cntp_ctl_EL02           sys_reg(3, 5, 14, 2, 1)
> +#define cntp_cval_EL02          sys_reg(3, 5, 14, 2, 2)
> +#define cntv_tval_EL02          sys_reg(3, 5, 14, 3, 0)
> +#define cntv_ctl_EL02           sys_reg(3, 5, 14, 3, 1)
> +#define cntv_cval_EL02          sys_reg(3, 5, 14, 3, 2)

as always, fun stuff to review.

> +#define spsr_EL12               sys_reg(3, 5, 4, 0, 0)
> +#define elr_EL12                sys_reg(3, 5, 4, 0, 1)
> +

I couldn't quite decipher the spec as to how these are the right
instruction encodings, so I'm going to trust the testing that this is
done right.

>  /**
>   * hyp_alternate_select - Generates patchable code sequences that are
>   * used to switch between two implementations of a function, depending
> -- 
> 2.1.4
> 

Thanks,
-Christoffer

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]


#1323151

FromMarc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>
Date2016-02-01 15:10 +0100
Message-ID<qXnl0-3Xr-21@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1323128
On 01/02/16 13:47, Christoffer Dall wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 03:53:42PM +0000, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>> VHE brings its own bag of new system registers, or rather system
>> register accessors, as it define new ways to access both guest
>> and host system registers. For example, from the host:
>>
>> - The host TCR_EL2 register is accessed using the TCR_EL1 accessor
>> - The guest TCR_EL1 register is accessed using the TCR_EL12 accessor
>>
>> Obviously, this is confusing. A way to somehow reduce the complexity
>> of writing code for both ARMv8 and ARMv8.1 is to use a set of unified
>> accessors that will generate the right sysreg, depending on the mode
>> the CPU is running in. For example:
>>
>> - read_sysreg_el1(tcr) will use TCR_EL1 on ARMv8, and TCR_EL12 on
>>   ARMv8.1 with VHE.
>> - read_sysreg_el2(tcr) will use TCR_EL2 on ARMv8, and TCR_EL1 on
>>   ARMv8.1 with VHE.
>>
>> We end up with three sets of accessors ({read,write}_sysreg_el[012])
>> that can be directly used from C code. We take this opportunity to
>> also add the definition for the new VHE sysregs.(
> 
> weird closing parenthesis.
> 
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>
>> ---
>>  arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/hyp.h | 72 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>  1 file changed, 72 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/hyp.h b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/hyp.h
>> index fc502f3..744c919 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/hyp.h
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/hyp.h
>> @@ -48,6 +48,78 @@ static inline unsigned long __hyp_kern_va(unsigned long v)
>>  
>>  #define hyp_kern_va(v) (typeof(v))(__hyp_kern_va((unsigned long)(v)))
>>  
>> +#define read_sysreg_elx(r,nvh,vh)					\
>> +	({								\
>> +		u64 reg;						\
>> +		asm volatile(ALTERNATIVE("mrs %0, " __stringify(r##nvh),\
>> +					 "mrs_s %0, " __stringify(r##vh),\
>> +					 ARM64_HAS_VIRT_HOST_EXTN)	\
>> +			     : "=r" (reg));				\
>> +		reg;							\
>> +	})
>> +
>> +#define write_sysreg_elx(v,r,nvh,vh)					\
>> +	do {								\
>> +		u64 __val = (u64)(v);					\
>> +		asm volatile(ALTERNATIVE("msr " __stringify(r##nvh) ", %x0",\
>> +					 "msr_s " __stringify(r##vh) ", %x0",\
>> +					 ARM64_HAS_VIRT_HOST_EXTN)	\
>> +					 : : "rZ" (__val));		\
> 
> what is rZ ?
> (complete Google-fu failure misery)

This gives the assembler the opportunity to generate a XZR register
access if the value is zero. See:

https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Machine-Constraints.html#Machine-Constraints

> 
>> +	} while (0)
>> +
>> +/*
>> + * Unified accessors for registers that have a different encoding
>> + * between VHE and non-VHE. They must be specified without their "ELx"
>> + * encoding.
>> + */
>> +#define read_sysreg_el2(r)						\
>> +	({								\
>> +		u64 reg;						\
>> +		asm volatile(ALTERNATIVE("mrs %0, " __stringify(r##_EL2),\
>> +					 "mrs %0, " __stringify(r##_EL1),\
>> +					 ARM64_HAS_VIRT_HOST_EXTN)	\
>> +			     : "=r" (reg));				\
>> +		reg;							\
>> +	})
>> +
>> +#define write_sysreg_el2(v,r)						\
>> +	do {								\
>> +		u64 __val = (u64)(v);					\
>> +		asm volatile(ALTERNATIVE("msr " __stringify(r##_EL2) ", %x0",\
>> +					 "msr " __stringify(r##_EL1) ", %x0",\
>> +					 ARM64_HAS_VIRT_HOST_EXTN)	\
>> +					 : : "rZ" (__val));		\
>> +	} while (0)
>> +
>> +#define read_sysreg_el0(r)	read_sysreg_elx(r, _EL0, _EL02)
>> +#define write_sysreg_el0(v,r)	write_sysreg_elx(v, r, _EL0, _EL02)
>> +#define read_sysreg_el1(r)	read_sysreg_elx(r, _EL1, _EL12)
>> +#define write_sysreg_el1(v,r)	write_sysreg_elx(v, r, _EL1, _EL12)
>> +
>> +/* The VHE specific system registers and their encoding */
>> +#define sctlr_EL12              sys_reg(3, 5, 1, 0, 0)
>> +#define cpacr_EL12              sys_reg(3, 5, 1, 0, 2)
>> +#define ttbr0_EL12              sys_reg(3, 5, 2, 0, 0)
>> +#define ttbr1_EL12              sys_reg(3, 5, 2, 0, 1)
>> +#define tcr_EL12                sys_reg(3, 5, 2, 0, 2)
>> +#define afsr0_EL12              sys_reg(3, 5, 5, 1, 0)
>> +#define afsr1_EL12              sys_reg(3, 5, 5, 1, 1)
>> +#define esr_EL12                sys_reg(3, 5, 5, 2, 0)
>> +#define far_EL12                sys_reg(3, 5, 6, 0, 0)
>> +#define mair_EL12               sys_reg(3, 5, 10, 2, 0)
>> +#define amair_EL12              sys_reg(3, 5, 10, 3, 0)
>> +#define vbar_EL12               sys_reg(3, 5, 12, 0, 0)
>> +#define contextidr_EL12         sys_reg(3, 5, 13, 0, 1)
>> +#define cntkctl_EL12            sys_reg(3, 5, 14, 1, 0)
>> +#define cntp_tval_EL02          sys_reg(3, 5, 14, 2, 0)
>> +#define cntp_ctl_EL02           sys_reg(3, 5, 14, 2, 1)
>> +#define cntp_cval_EL02          sys_reg(3, 5, 14, 2, 2)
>> +#define cntv_tval_EL02          sys_reg(3, 5, 14, 3, 0)
>> +#define cntv_ctl_EL02           sys_reg(3, 5, 14, 3, 1)
>> +#define cntv_cval_EL02          sys_reg(3, 5, 14, 3, 2)
> 
> as always, fun stuff to review.

Well, short of having publicly available documentation, or force
everyone to upgrade their binutils to deal be able to cope with the new
sysregs, I don't know what else to do. I'm open to suggestions, though.

> 
>> +#define spsr_EL12               sys_reg(3, 5, 4, 0, 0)
>> +#define elr_EL12                sys_reg(3, 5, 4, 0, 1)
>> +
> 
> I couldn't quite decipher the spec as to how these are the right
> instruction encodings, so I'm going to trust the testing that this is
> done right.

If you have access to the spec, you have to play a substitution game
between the canonical encoding of the register accessed, and the
register used. For example:

SPSR_EL1 (3, 0, 4, 0, 0) -> SPSR_EL12 (3, 5, 4, 0, 0)

In practice, only Op1 changes.

	M.
-- 
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#1323244

FromChristoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@linaro.org>
Date2016-02-01 16:50 +0100
Message-ID<qXoTM-4WL-11@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1323151
On Mon, Feb 01, 2016 at 02:04:39PM +0000, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On 01/02/16 13:47, Christoffer Dall wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 03:53:42PM +0000, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> >> VHE brings its own bag of new system registers, or rather system
> >> register accessors, as it define new ways to access both guest
> >> and host system registers. For example, from the host:
> >>
> >> - The host TCR_EL2 register is accessed using the TCR_EL1 accessor
> >> - The guest TCR_EL1 register is accessed using the TCR_EL12 accessor
> >>
> >> Obviously, this is confusing. A way to somehow reduce the complexity
> >> of writing code for both ARMv8 and ARMv8.1 is to use a set of unified
> >> accessors that will generate the right sysreg, depending on the mode
> >> the CPU is running in. For example:
> >>
> >> - read_sysreg_el1(tcr) will use TCR_EL1 on ARMv8, and TCR_EL12 on
> >>   ARMv8.1 with VHE.
> >> - read_sysreg_el2(tcr) will use TCR_EL2 on ARMv8, and TCR_EL1 on
> >>   ARMv8.1 with VHE.
> >>
> >> We end up with three sets of accessors ({read,write}_sysreg_el[012])
> >> that can be directly used from C code. We take this opportunity to
> >> also add the definition for the new VHE sysregs.(
> > 
> > weird closing parenthesis.
> > 
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>
> >> ---
> >>  arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/hyp.h | 72 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >>  1 file changed, 72 insertions(+)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/hyp.h b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/hyp.h
> >> index fc502f3..744c919 100644
> >> --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/hyp.h
> >> +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/hyp.h
> >> @@ -48,6 +48,78 @@ static inline unsigned long __hyp_kern_va(unsigned long v)
> >>  
> >>  #define hyp_kern_va(v) (typeof(v))(__hyp_kern_va((unsigned long)(v)))
> >>  
> >> +#define read_sysreg_elx(r,nvh,vh)					\
> >> +	({								\
> >> +		u64 reg;						\
> >> +		asm volatile(ALTERNATIVE("mrs %0, " __stringify(r##nvh),\
> >> +					 "mrs_s %0, " __stringify(r##vh),\
> >> +					 ARM64_HAS_VIRT_HOST_EXTN)	\
> >> +			     : "=r" (reg));				\
> >> +		reg;							\
> >> +	})
> >> +
> >> +#define write_sysreg_elx(v,r,nvh,vh)					\
> >> +	do {								\
> >> +		u64 __val = (u64)(v);					\
> >> +		asm volatile(ALTERNATIVE("msr " __stringify(r##nvh) ", %x0",\
> >> +					 "msr_s " __stringify(r##vh) ", %x0",\
> >> +					 ARM64_HAS_VIRT_HOST_EXTN)	\
> >> +					 : : "rZ" (__val));		\
> > 
> > what is rZ ?
> > (complete Google-fu failure misery)
> 
> This gives the assembler the opportunity to generate a XZR register
> access if the value is zero. See:
> 
> https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Machine-Constraints.html#Machine-Constraints
> 

I don't know why I didn't find this.

So "Integer constant zero " means, this may be zero.  Right.

> > 
> >> +	} while (0)
> >> +
> >> +/*
> >> + * Unified accessors for registers that have a different encoding
> >> + * between VHE and non-VHE. They must be specified without their "ELx"
> >> + * encoding.
> >> + */
> >> +#define read_sysreg_el2(r)						\
> >> +	({								\
> >> +		u64 reg;						\
> >> +		asm volatile(ALTERNATIVE("mrs %0, " __stringify(r##_EL2),\
> >> +					 "mrs %0, " __stringify(r##_EL1),\
> >> +					 ARM64_HAS_VIRT_HOST_EXTN)	\
> >> +			     : "=r" (reg));				\
> >> +		reg;							\
> >> +	})
> >> +
> >> +#define write_sysreg_el2(v,r)						\
> >> +	do {								\
> >> +		u64 __val = (u64)(v);					\
> >> +		asm volatile(ALTERNATIVE("msr " __stringify(r##_EL2) ", %x0",\
> >> +					 "msr " __stringify(r##_EL1) ", %x0",\
> >> +					 ARM64_HAS_VIRT_HOST_EXTN)	\
> >> +					 : : "rZ" (__val));		\
> >> +	} while (0)
> >> +
> >> +#define read_sysreg_el0(r)	read_sysreg_elx(r, _EL0, _EL02)
> >> +#define write_sysreg_el0(v,r)	write_sysreg_elx(v, r, _EL0, _EL02)
> >> +#define read_sysreg_el1(r)	read_sysreg_elx(r, _EL1, _EL12)
> >> +#define write_sysreg_el1(v,r)	write_sysreg_elx(v, r, _EL1, _EL12)
> >> +
> >> +/* The VHE specific system registers and their encoding */
> >> +#define sctlr_EL12              sys_reg(3, 5, 1, 0, 0)
> >> +#define cpacr_EL12              sys_reg(3, 5, 1, 0, 2)
> >> +#define ttbr0_EL12              sys_reg(3, 5, 2, 0, 0)
> >> +#define ttbr1_EL12              sys_reg(3, 5, 2, 0, 1)
> >> +#define tcr_EL12                sys_reg(3, 5, 2, 0, 2)
> >> +#define afsr0_EL12              sys_reg(3, 5, 5, 1, 0)
> >> +#define afsr1_EL12              sys_reg(3, 5, 5, 1, 1)
> >> +#define esr_EL12                sys_reg(3, 5, 5, 2, 0)
> >> +#define far_EL12                sys_reg(3, 5, 6, 0, 0)
> >> +#define mair_EL12               sys_reg(3, 5, 10, 2, 0)
> >> +#define amair_EL12              sys_reg(3, 5, 10, 3, 0)
> >> +#define vbar_EL12               sys_reg(3, 5, 12, 0, 0)
> >> +#define contextidr_EL12         sys_reg(3, 5, 13, 0, 1)
> >> +#define cntkctl_EL12            sys_reg(3, 5, 14, 1, 0)
> >> +#define cntp_tval_EL02          sys_reg(3, 5, 14, 2, 0)
> >> +#define cntp_ctl_EL02           sys_reg(3, 5, 14, 2, 1)
> >> +#define cntp_cval_EL02          sys_reg(3, 5, 14, 2, 2)
> >> +#define cntv_tval_EL02          sys_reg(3, 5, 14, 3, 0)
> >> +#define cntv_ctl_EL02           sys_reg(3, 5, 14, 3, 1)
> >> +#define cntv_cval_EL02          sys_reg(3, 5, 14, 3, 2)
> > 
> > as always, fun stuff to review.
> 
> Well, short of having publicly available documentation, or force
> everyone to upgrade their binutils to deal be able to cope with the new
> sysregs, I don't know what else to do. I'm open to suggestions, though.
> 

I wasn't suggesting you do anything different, I just put the stupid
comment there so you knew that I actually checked the values and so that
I didn't forget that I did, and ended up doing it again if I look at
this later...

> > 
> >> +#define spsr_EL12               sys_reg(3, 5, 4, 0, 0)
> >> +#define elr_EL12                sys_reg(3, 5, 4, 0, 1)
> >> +
> > 
> > I couldn't quite decipher the spec as to how these are the right
> > instruction encodings, so I'm going to trust the testing that this is
> > done right.
> 
> If you have access to the spec, you have to play a substitution game
> between the canonical encoding of the register accessed, and the
> register used. For example:
> 
> SPSR_EL1 (3, 0, 4, 0, 0) -> SPSR_EL12 (3, 5, 4, 0, 0)
> 
> In practice, only Op1 changes.
> 
That's what I assumed, thanks for confirming.

-Christoffer

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]


Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel


csiph-web