2023-10-12 05:16:37

by Anup Patel

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: [PATCH v2 3/8] RISC-V: KVM: Allow some SBI extensions to be disabled by default

Currently, all SBI extensions are enabled by default which is
problematic for SBI extensions (such as DBCN) which are forwarded
to the KVM user-space because we might have an older KVM user-space
which is not aware/ready to handle newer SBI extensions. Ideally,
the SBI extensions forwarded to the KVM user-space must be
disabled by default.

To address above, we allow certain SBI extensions to be disabled
by default so that KVM user-space must explicitly enable such
SBI extensions to receive forwarded calls from Guest VCPU.

Signed-off-by: Anup Patel <[email protected]>
---
arch/riscv/include/asm/kvm_vcpu_sbi.h | 4 +++
arch/riscv/kvm/vcpu.c | 6 ++++
arch/riscv/kvm/vcpu_sbi.c | 45 ++++++++++++++++-----------
3 files changed, 36 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/riscv/include/asm/kvm_vcpu_sbi.h b/arch/riscv/include/asm/kvm_vcpu_sbi.h
index 8d6d4dce8a5e..c02bda5559d7 100644
--- a/arch/riscv/include/asm/kvm_vcpu_sbi.h
+++ b/arch/riscv/include/asm/kvm_vcpu_sbi.h
@@ -35,6 +35,9 @@ struct kvm_vcpu_sbi_return {
struct kvm_vcpu_sbi_extension {
unsigned long extid_start;
unsigned long extid_end;
+
+ bool default_unavail;
+
/**
* SBI extension handler. It can be defined for a given extension or group of
* extension. But it should always return linux error codes rather than SBI
@@ -59,6 +62,7 @@ int kvm_riscv_vcpu_get_reg_sbi_ext(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
const struct kvm_vcpu_sbi_extension *kvm_vcpu_sbi_find_ext(
struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, unsigned long extid);
int kvm_riscv_vcpu_sbi_ecall(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct kvm_run *run);
+void kvm_riscv_vcpu_sbi_init(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu);

#ifdef CONFIG_RISCV_SBI_V01
extern const struct kvm_vcpu_sbi_extension vcpu_sbi_ext_v01;
diff --git a/arch/riscv/kvm/vcpu.c b/arch/riscv/kvm/vcpu.c
index c061a1c5fe98..e087c809073c 100644
--- a/arch/riscv/kvm/vcpu.c
+++ b/arch/riscv/kvm/vcpu.c
@@ -141,6 +141,12 @@ int kvm_arch_vcpu_create(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
if (rc)
return rc;

+ /*
+ * Setup SBI extensions
+ * NOTE: This must be the last thing to be initialized.
+ */
+ kvm_riscv_vcpu_sbi_init(vcpu);
+
/* Reset VCPU */
kvm_riscv_reset_vcpu(vcpu);

diff --git a/arch/riscv/kvm/vcpu_sbi.c b/arch/riscv/kvm/vcpu_sbi.c
index 9cd97091c723..1b1cee86efda 100644
--- a/arch/riscv/kvm/vcpu_sbi.c
+++ b/arch/riscv/kvm/vcpu_sbi.c
@@ -155,14 +155,8 @@ static int riscv_vcpu_set_sbi_ext_single(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
if (!sext)
return -ENOENT;

- /*
- * We can't set the extension status to available here, since it may
- * have a probe() function which needs to confirm availability first,
- * but it may be too early to call that here. We can set the status to
- * unavailable, though.
- */
- if (!reg_val)
- scontext->ext_status[sext->ext_idx] =
+ scontext->ext_status[sext->ext_idx] = (reg_val) ?
+ KVM_RISCV_SBI_EXT_AVAILABLE :
KVM_RISCV_SBI_EXT_UNAVAILABLE;

return 0;
@@ -337,18 +331,8 @@ const struct kvm_vcpu_sbi_extension *kvm_vcpu_sbi_find_ext(
scontext->ext_status[entry->ext_idx] ==
KVM_RISCV_SBI_EXT_AVAILABLE)
return ext;
- if (scontext->ext_status[entry->ext_idx] ==
- KVM_RISCV_SBI_EXT_UNAVAILABLE)
- return NULL;
- if (ext->probe && !ext->probe(vcpu)) {
- scontext->ext_status[entry->ext_idx] =
- KVM_RISCV_SBI_EXT_UNAVAILABLE;
- return NULL;
- }

- scontext->ext_status[entry->ext_idx] =
- KVM_RISCV_SBI_EXT_AVAILABLE;
- return ext;
+ return NULL;
}
}

@@ -419,3 +403,26 @@ int kvm_riscv_vcpu_sbi_ecall(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct kvm_run *run)

return ret;
}
+
+void kvm_riscv_vcpu_sbi_init(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
+{
+ struct kvm_vcpu_sbi_context *scontext = &vcpu->arch.sbi_context;
+ const struct kvm_riscv_sbi_extension_entry *entry;
+ const struct kvm_vcpu_sbi_extension *ext;
+ int i;
+
+ for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(sbi_ext); i++) {
+ entry = &sbi_ext[i];
+ ext = entry->ext_ptr;
+
+ if (ext->probe && !ext->probe(vcpu)) {
+ scontext->ext_status[entry->ext_idx] =
+ KVM_RISCV_SBI_EXT_UNAVAILABLE;
+ continue;
+ }
+
+ scontext->ext_status[entry->ext_idx] = ext->default_unavail ?
+ KVM_RISCV_SBI_EXT_UNAVAILABLE :
+ KVM_RISCV_SBI_EXT_AVAILABLE;
+ }
+}
--
2.34.1


2023-10-19 07:58:22

by Andrew Jones

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/8] RISC-V: KVM: Allow some SBI extensions to be disabled by default

On Thu, Oct 12, 2023 at 10:45:04AM +0530, Anup Patel wrote:
> Currently, all SBI extensions are enabled by default which is
> problematic for SBI extensions (such as DBCN) which are forwarded
> to the KVM user-space because we might have an older KVM user-space
> which is not aware/ready to handle newer SBI extensions. Ideally,
> the SBI extensions forwarded to the KVM user-space must be
> disabled by default.
>
> To address above, we allow certain SBI extensions to be disabled
> by default so that KVM user-space must explicitly enable such
> SBI extensions to receive forwarded calls from Guest VCPU.
>
> Signed-off-by: Anup Patel <[email protected]>
> ---
> arch/riscv/include/asm/kvm_vcpu_sbi.h | 4 +++
> arch/riscv/kvm/vcpu.c | 6 ++++
> arch/riscv/kvm/vcpu_sbi.c | 45 ++++++++++++++++-----------
> 3 files changed, 36 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/riscv/include/asm/kvm_vcpu_sbi.h b/arch/riscv/include/asm/kvm_vcpu_sbi.h
> index 8d6d4dce8a5e..c02bda5559d7 100644
> --- a/arch/riscv/include/asm/kvm_vcpu_sbi.h
> +++ b/arch/riscv/include/asm/kvm_vcpu_sbi.h
> @@ -35,6 +35,9 @@ struct kvm_vcpu_sbi_return {
> struct kvm_vcpu_sbi_extension {
> unsigned long extid_start;
> unsigned long extid_end;
> +
> + bool default_unavail;
> +
> /**
> * SBI extension handler. It can be defined for a given extension or group of
> * extension. But it should always return linux error codes rather than SBI
> @@ -59,6 +62,7 @@ int kvm_riscv_vcpu_get_reg_sbi_ext(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
> const struct kvm_vcpu_sbi_extension *kvm_vcpu_sbi_find_ext(
> struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, unsigned long extid);
> int kvm_riscv_vcpu_sbi_ecall(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct kvm_run *run);
> +void kvm_riscv_vcpu_sbi_init(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu);
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_RISCV_SBI_V01
> extern const struct kvm_vcpu_sbi_extension vcpu_sbi_ext_v01;
> diff --git a/arch/riscv/kvm/vcpu.c b/arch/riscv/kvm/vcpu.c
> index c061a1c5fe98..e087c809073c 100644
> --- a/arch/riscv/kvm/vcpu.c
> +++ b/arch/riscv/kvm/vcpu.c
> @@ -141,6 +141,12 @@ int kvm_arch_vcpu_create(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> if (rc)
> return rc;
>
> + /*
> + * Setup SBI extensions
> + * NOTE: This must be the last thing to be initialized.
> + */
> + kvm_riscv_vcpu_sbi_init(vcpu);

With this, we no longer defer probing to the first access (whether that's
by the guest or KVM userspace). With our current small set of SBI
extensions where only a single one has a probe function, then this
simpler approach is good enough. We can always go back to the lazy
approach later if needed.

> +
> /* Reset VCPU */
> kvm_riscv_reset_vcpu(vcpu);
>
> diff --git a/arch/riscv/kvm/vcpu_sbi.c b/arch/riscv/kvm/vcpu_sbi.c
> index 9cd97091c723..1b1cee86efda 100644
> --- a/arch/riscv/kvm/vcpu_sbi.c
> +++ b/arch/riscv/kvm/vcpu_sbi.c
> @@ -155,14 +155,8 @@ static int riscv_vcpu_set_sbi_ext_single(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
> if (!sext)
> return -ENOENT;
>
> - /*
> - * We can't set the extension status to available here, since it may
> - * have a probe() function which needs to confirm availability first,
> - * but it may be too early to call that here. We can set the status to
> - * unavailable, though.
> - */
> - if (!reg_val)
> - scontext->ext_status[sext->ext_idx] =
> + scontext->ext_status[sext->ext_idx] = (reg_val) ?
> + KVM_RISCV_SBI_EXT_AVAILABLE :
> KVM_RISCV_SBI_EXT_UNAVAILABLE;

We're missing the change to riscv_vcpu_get_sbi_ext_single() which should
also drop the comment block explaining the limits to status knowledge
without initial probing (which we now do) and then just check for
available, i.e.

diff --git a/arch/riscv/kvm/vcpu_sbi.c b/arch/riscv/kvm/vcpu_sbi.c
index bb76c3cf633f..92c42d9aba1c 100644
--- a/arch/riscv/kvm/vcpu_sbi.c
+++ b/arch/riscv/kvm/vcpu_sbi.c
@@ -186,15 +186,8 @@ static int riscv_vcpu_get_sbi_ext_single(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
if (!sext)
return -ENOENT;

- /*
- * If the extension status is still uninitialized, then we should probe
- * to determine if it's available, but it may be too early to do that
- * here. The best we can do is report that the extension has not been
- * disabled, i.e. we return 1 when the extension is available and also
- * when it only may be available.
- */
- *reg_val = scontext->ext_status[sext->ext_idx] !=
- KVM_RISCV_SBI_EXT_UNAVAILABLE;
+ *reg_val = scontext->ext_status[sext->ext_idx] ==
+ KVM_RISCV_SBI_EXT_AVAILABLE;

return 0;
}

>
> return 0;
> @@ -337,18 +331,8 @@ const struct kvm_vcpu_sbi_extension *kvm_vcpu_sbi_find_ext(
> scontext->ext_status[entry->ext_idx] ==
> KVM_RISCV_SBI_EXT_AVAILABLE)
> return ext;
> - if (scontext->ext_status[entry->ext_idx] ==
> - KVM_RISCV_SBI_EXT_UNAVAILABLE)
> - return NULL;
> - if (ext->probe && !ext->probe(vcpu)) {
> - scontext->ext_status[entry->ext_idx] =
> - KVM_RISCV_SBI_EXT_UNAVAILABLE;
> - return NULL;
> - }
>
> - scontext->ext_status[entry->ext_idx] =
> - KVM_RISCV_SBI_EXT_AVAILABLE;
> - return ext;
> + return NULL;
> }
> }
>
> @@ -419,3 +403,26 @@ int kvm_riscv_vcpu_sbi_ecall(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct kvm_run *run)
>
> return ret;
> }
> +
> +void kvm_riscv_vcpu_sbi_init(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> +{
> + struct kvm_vcpu_sbi_context *scontext = &vcpu->arch.sbi_context;
> + const struct kvm_riscv_sbi_extension_entry *entry;
> + const struct kvm_vcpu_sbi_extension *ext;
> + int i;
> +
> + for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(sbi_ext); i++) {
> + entry = &sbi_ext[i];
> + ext = entry->ext_ptr;
> +
> + if (ext->probe && !ext->probe(vcpu)) {
> + scontext->ext_status[entry->ext_idx] =
> + KVM_RISCV_SBI_EXT_UNAVAILABLE;
> + continue;
> + }
> +
> + scontext->ext_status[entry->ext_idx] = ext->default_unavail ?
> + KVM_RISCV_SBI_EXT_UNAVAILABLE :
> + KVM_RISCV_SBI_EXT_AVAILABLE;
> + }
> +}
> --
> 2.34.1
>

Thanks,
drew

2023-10-20 05:26:53

by Anup Patel

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/8] RISC-V: KVM: Allow some SBI extensions to be disabled by default

On Thu, Oct 19, 2023 at 1:27 PM Andrew Jones <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Oct 12, 2023 at 10:45:04AM +0530, Anup Patel wrote:
> > Currently, all SBI extensions are enabled by default which is
> > problematic for SBI extensions (such as DBCN) which are forwarded
> > to the KVM user-space because we might have an older KVM user-space
> > which is not aware/ready to handle newer SBI extensions. Ideally,
> > the SBI extensions forwarded to the KVM user-space must be
> > disabled by default.
> >
> > To address above, we allow certain SBI extensions to be disabled
> > by default so that KVM user-space must explicitly enable such
> > SBI extensions to receive forwarded calls from Guest VCPU.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Anup Patel <[email protected]>
> > ---
> > arch/riscv/include/asm/kvm_vcpu_sbi.h | 4 +++
> > arch/riscv/kvm/vcpu.c | 6 ++++
> > arch/riscv/kvm/vcpu_sbi.c | 45 ++++++++++++++++-----------
> > 3 files changed, 36 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/riscv/include/asm/kvm_vcpu_sbi.h b/arch/riscv/include/asm/kvm_vcpu_sbi.h
> > index 8d6d4dce8a5e..c02bda5559d7 100644
> > --- a/arch/riscv/include/asm/kvm_vcpu_sbi.h
> > +++ b/arch/riscv/include/asm/kvm_vcpu_sbi.h
> > @@ -35,6 +35,9 @@ struct kvm_vcpu_sbi_return {
> > struct kvm_vcpu_sbi_extension {
> > unsigned long extid_start;
> > unsigned long extid_end;
> > +
> > + bool default_unavail;
> > +
> > /**
> > * SBI extension handler. It can be defined for a given extension or group of
> > * extension. But it should always return linux error codes rather than SBI
> > @@ -59,6 +62,7 @@ int kvm_riscv_vcpu_get_reg_sbi_ext(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
> > const struct kvm_vcpu_sbi_extension *kvm_vcpu_sbi_find_ext(
> > struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, unsigned long extid);
> > int kvm_riscv_vcpu_sbi_ecall(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct kvm_run *run);
> > +void kvm_riscv_vcpu_sbi_init(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu);
> >
> > #ifdef CONFIG_RISCV_SBI_V01
> > extern const struct kvm_vcpu_sbi_extension vcpu_sbi_ext_v01;
> > diff --git a/arch/riscv/kvm/vcpu.c b/arch/riscv/kvm/vcpu.c
> > index c061a1c5fe98..e087c809073c 100644
> > --- a/arch/riscv/kvm/vcpu.c
> > +++ b/arch/riscv/kvm/vcpu.c
> > @@ -141,6 +141,12 @@ int kvm_arch_vcpu_create(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> > if (rc)
> > return rc;
> >
> > + /*
> > + * Setup SBI extensions
> > + * NOTE: This must be the last thing to be initialized.
> > + */
> > + kvm_riscv_vcpu_sbi_init(vcpu);
>
> With this, we no longer defer probing to the first access (whether that's
> by the guest or KVM userspace). With our current small set of SBI
> extensions where only a single one has a probe function, then this
> simpler approach is good enough. We can always go back to the lazy
> approach later if needed.

I agree. We can fallback to lazy probing in the future if required.

>
> > +
> > /* Reset VCPU */
> > kvm_riscv_reset_vcpu(vcpu);
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/riscv/kvm/vcpu_sbi.c b/arch/riscv/kvm/vcpu_sbi.c
> > index 9cd97091c723..1b1cee86efda 100644
> > --- a/arch/riscv/kvm/vcpu_sbi.c
> > +++ b/arch/riscv/kvm/vcpu_sbi.c
> > @@ -155,14 +155,8 @@ static int riscv_vcpu_set_sbi_ext_single(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
> > if (!sext)
> > return -ENOENT;
> >
> > - /*
> > - * We can't set the extension status to available here, since it may
> > - * have a probe() function which needs to confirm availability first,
> > - * but it may be too early to call that here. We can set the status to
> > - * unavailable, though.
> > - */
> > - if (!reg_val)
> > - scontext->ext_status[sext->ext_idx] =
> > + scontext->ext_status[sext->ext_idx] = (reg_val) ?
> > + KVM_RISCV_SBI_EXT_AVAILABLE :
> > KVM_RISCV_SBI_EXT_UNAVAILABLE;
>
> We're missing the change to riscv_vcpu_get_sbi_ext_single() which should
> also drop the comment block explaining the limits to status knowledge
> without initial probing (which we now do) and then just check for
> available, i.e.
>
> diff --git a/arch/riscv/kvm/vcpu_sbi.c b/arch/riscv/kvm/vcpu_sbi.c
> index bb76c3cf633f..92c42d9aba1c 100644
> --- a/arch/riscv/kvm/vcpu_sbi.c
> +++ b/arch/riscv/kvm/vcpu_sbi.c
> @@ -186,15 +186,8 @@ static int riscv_vcpu_get_sbi_ext_single(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
> if (!sext)
> return -ENOENT;
>
> - /*
> - * If the extension status is still uninitialized, then we should probe
> - * to determine if it's available, but it may be too early to do that
> - * here. The best we can do is report that the extension has not been
> - * disabled, i.e. we return 1 when the extension is available and also
> - * when it only may be available.
> - */
> - *reg_val = scontext->ext_status[sext->ext_idx] !=
> - KVM_RISCV_SBI_EXT_UNAVAILABLE;
> + *reg_val = scontext->ext_status[sext->ext_idx] ==
> + KVM_RISCV_SBI_EXT_AVAILABLE;
>
> return 0;
> }

Thanks, I will include this change in the next revision.

>
> >
> > return 0;
> > @@ -337,18 +331,8 @@ const struct kvm_vcpu_sbi_extension *kvm_vcpu_sbi_find_ext(
> > scontext->ext_status[entry->ext_idx] ==
> > KVM_RISCV_SBI_EXT_AVAILABLE)
> > return ext;
> > - if (scontext->ext_status[entry->ext_idx] ==
> > - KVM_RISCV_SBI_EXT_UNAVAILABLE)
> > - return NULL;
> > - if (ext->probe && !ext->probe(vcpu)) {
> > - scontext->ext_status[entry->ext_idx] =
> > - KVM_RISCV_SBI_EXT_UNAVAILABLE;
> > - return NULL;
> > - }
> >
> > - scontext->ext_status[entry->ext_idx] =
> > - KVM_RISCV_SBI_EXT_AVAILABLE;
> > - return ext;
> > + return NULL;
> > }
> > }
> >
> > @@ -419,3 +403,26 @@ int kvm_riscv_vcpu_sbi_ecall(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct kvm_run *run)
> >
> > return ret;
> > }
> > +
> > +void kvm_riscv_vcpu_sbi_init(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> > +{
> > + struct kvm_vcpu_sbi_context *scontext = &vcpu->arch.sbi_context;
> > + const struct kvm_riscv_sbi_extension_entry *entry;
> > + const struct kvm_vcpu_sbi_extension *ext;
> > + int i;
> > +
> > + for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(sbi_ext); i++) {
> > + entry = &sbi_ext[i];
> > + ext = entry->ext_ptr;
> > +
> > + if (ext->probe && !ext->probe(vcpu)) {
> > + scontext->ext_status[entry->ext_idx] =
> > + KVM_RISCV_SBI_EXT_UNAVAILABLE;
> > + continue;
> > + }
> > +
> > + scontext->ext_status[entry->ext_idx] = ext->default_unavail ?
> > + KVM_RISCV_SBI_EXT_UNAVAILABLE :
> > + KVM_RISCV_SBI_EXT_AVAILABLE;
> > + }
> > +}
> > --
> > 2.34.1
> >
>
> Thanks,
> drew

Regards,
Anup