DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 smtp.codeaurora.org 1A8B0601EB
Subject: Re: [PATCH V11 10/10] arm/arm64: KVM: add guest SEA support
To: James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>
References: <1487712121-16688-1-git-send-email-tbaicar@codeaurora.org>
 <1487712121-16688-11-git-send-email-tbaicar@codeaurora.org>
 <58B00E12.5020602@arm.com>
 <ff3aa805-0e03-9854-e294-ff6934c57f3f@codeaurora.org>
 <58BD39B4.9050809@arm.com>
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, rjw@rjwysocki.net, lenb@kernel.org,
        matt@codeblueprint.co.uk, robert.moore@intel.com, lv.zheng@intel.com,
        nkaje@codeaurora.org, zjzhang@codeaurora.org, mark.rutland@arm.com,
        akpm@linux-foundation.org, eun.taik.lee@samsung.com,
        sandeepa.s.prabhu@gmail.com, labbott@redhat.com, shijie.huang@arm.com,
        rruigrok@codeaurora.org, paul.gortmaker@windriver.com, tn@semihalf.com,
        fu.wei@linaro.org, rostedt@goodmis.org, bristot@redhat.com,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu,
        kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-efi@vger.kernel.org,
        devel@acpica.org, Suzuki.Poulose@arm.com, punit.agrawal@arm.com,
        astone@redhat.com, harba@codeaurora.org, hanjun.guo@linaro.org,
        john.garry@huawei.com, shiju.jose@huawei.com, joe@perches.com
From: "Baicar, Tyler" <tbaicar@codeaurora.org>
Message-ID: <4b4bea7c-7591-8051-7be0-528581f29d10@codeaurora.org>
Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2017 07:00:30 -0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/45.7.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <58BD39B4.9050809@arm.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1918
Lines: 46

Hello James,


On 3/6/2017 3:28 AM, James Morse wrote:
> On 28/02/17 19:43, Baicar, Tyler wrote:
>> On 2/24/2017 3:42 AM, James Morse wrote:
>>> On 21/02/17 21:22, Tyler Baicar wrote:
>>>> Currently external aborts are unsupported by the guest abort
>>>> handling. Add handling for SEAs so that the host kernel reports
>>>> SEAs which occur in the guest kernel.
>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/fault.c b/arch/arm64/mm/fault.c
>>>> index b2d57fc..403277b 100644
>>>> --- a/arch/arm64/mm/fault.c
>>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/fault.c
>>>> @@ -602,6 +602,24 @@ static const char *fault_name(unsigned int esr)
>>>>    }
>>>>
>>>>    /*
>>>> + * Handle Synchronous External Aborts that occur in a guest kernel.
>>>> + */
>>>> +int handle_guest_sea(unsigned long addr, unsigned int esr)
>>>> +{
>>>> +    if(IS_ENABLED(HAVE_ACPI_APEI_SEA)) {
>>>> +        nmi_enter();
>>>> +        ghes_notify_sea();
>>>> +        nmi_exit();
>>> This nmi stuff was needed for synchronous aborts that may have interrupted
>>> APEI's interrupts-masked code. We want to avoid trying to take the same set of
>>> locks, hence taking the in_nmi() path through APEI. Here we know we interrupted
>>> a guest, so there is no risk that we have interrupted APEI on the host.
>>> ghes_notify_sea() can safely take the normal path.
>> Makes sense, I can remove the nmi_* calls here.
> Just occurs to me: if we do this we need to add the rcu_read_lock() in
> ghes_notify_sea() as its not protected by the rcu/nmi weirdness.
>
True, would you suggest leaving these nmi_* calls or adding the rcu_* 
calls? And since that's only needed for this KVM case, shouldn't the 
rcu_* calls just replace the nmi_* calls here (outside of ghes_notify_sea)?

Thanks,
Tyler

-- 
Qualcomm Datacenter Technologies, Inc. as an affiliate of Qualcomm Technologies, Inc.
Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project.