Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933619AbdDGPlm (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 Apr 2017 11:41:42 -0400 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.101.70]:57086 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755013AbdDGPld (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 Apr 2017 11:41:33 -0400 Subject: Re: [RFC 8/9] arm64/kvm: context-switch PAC registers To: Mark Rutland , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org References: <1491232765-32501-1-git-send-email-mark.rutland@arm.com> <1491232765-32501-9-git-send-email-mark.rutland@arm.com> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, arnd@arndb.de, catalin.marinas@arm.com, christoffer.dall@linaro.org, jiong.wang@arm.com, kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, suzuki.poulose@arm.com, will.deacon@arm.com From: Marc Zyngier Organization: ARM Ltd Message-ID: <973af0d9-f7bc-24ee-567d-23e0e487b970@arm.com> Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2017 16:41:29 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1491232765-32501-9-git-send-email-mark.rutland@arm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 4538 Lines: 128 Hi Mark, On 03/04/17 16:19, Mark Rutland wrote: > If we have pointer authentication support, a guest may wish to use it. > This patch adds the infrastructure to allow it to do so. > > This is sufficient for basic testing, but not for real-world usage. A > guest will still see pointer authentication support advertised in the ID > registers, and we will need to trap accesses to these to provide > santized values. > > Signed-off-by: Mark Rutland > Cc: Christoffer Dall > Cc: Marc Zyngier > Cc: kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu > --- > arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_emulate.h | 15 +++++++++++++ > arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h | 12 ++++++++++ > arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/sysreg-sr.c | 43 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > 3 files changed, 70 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_emulate.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_emulate.h > index f5ea0ba..0c3cb43 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_emulate.h > +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_emulate.h > @@ -28,6 +28,8 @@ > #include > #include > #include > +#include > +#include > #include > #include > > @@ -49,6 +51,19 @@ static inline void vcpu_reset_hcr(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > vcpu->arch.hcr_el2 |= HCR_E2H; > if (test_bit(KVM_ARM_VCPU_EL1_32BIT, vcpu->arch.features)) > vcpu->arch.hcr_el2 &= ~HCR_RW; > + > + /* > + * Address auth and generic auth share the same enable bits, so we have > + * to ensure both are uniform before we can enable support in a guest. > + * Until we have the infrastructure to detect uniform absence of a > + * feature, only permit the case when both are supported. > + * > + * Note that a guest will still see the feature in ID_AA64_ISAR1 until > + * we introduce code to emulate the ID registers. > + */ > + if (cpus_have_const_cap(ARM64_HAS_ADDRESS_AUTH) && > + cpus_have_const_cap(ARM64_HAS_GENERIC_AUTH)) > + vcpu->arch.hcr_el2 |= (HCR_API | HCR_APK); Instead of unconditionally allowing the guest to access this feature... > } > > static inline unsigned long vcpu_get_hcr(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h > index e7705e7..b25f710 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h > +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h > @@ -133,6 +133,18 @@ enum vcpu_sysreg { > PMSWINC_EL0, /* Software Increment Register */ > PMUSERENR_EL0, /* User Enable Register */ > > + /* Pointer Authentication Registers */ > + APIAKEYLO_EL1, > + APIAKEYHI_EL1, > + APIBKEYLO_EL1, > + APIBKEYHI_EL1, > + APDAKEYLO_EL1, > + APDAKEYHI_EL1, > + APDBKEYLO_EL1, > + APDBKEYHI_EL1, > + APGAKEYLO_EL1, > + APGAKEYHI_EL1, > + > /* 32bit specific registers. Keep them at the end of the range */ > DACR32_EL2, /* Domain Access Control Register */ > IFSR32_EL2, /* Instruction Fault Status Register */ > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/sysreg-sr.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/sysreg-sr.c > index 9341376..3440b42 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/sysreg-sr.c > +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/sysreg-sr.c > @@ -18,6 +18,8 @@ > #include > #include > > +#include > +#include > #include > #include > > @@ -31,6 +33,24 @@ static void __hyp_text __sysreg_do_nothing(struct kvm_cpu_context *ctxt) { } > * pstate, and guest must save everything. > */ > > +#define __save_ap_key(regs, key) \ > + regs[key ## KEYLO_EL1] = read_sysreg_s(SYS_ ## key ## KEYLO_EL1); \ > + regs[key ## KEYHI_EL1] = read_sysreg_s(SYS_ ## key ## KEYHI_EL1) > + > +static void __hyp_text __sysreg_save_ap_keys(struct kvm_cpu_context *ctxt) > +{ > + if (cpus_have_const_cap(ARM64_HAS_ADDRESS_AUTH)) { > + __save_ap_key(ctxt->sys_regs, APIA); > + __save_ap_key(ctxt->sys_regs, APIB); > + __save_ap_key(ctxt->sys_regs, APDA); > + __save_ap_key(ctxt->sys_regs, APDB); > + } > + > + if (cpus_have_const_cap(ARM64_HAS_GENERIC_AUTH)) { > + __save_ap_key(ctxt->sys_regs, APGA); > + } > +} > + ...which immediately translates in quite a bit of sysreg churn on both host and guest (specially given that these are not banked by exception level), could we make it a bit more lazy instead? Even an "enable on first use" would be good, given that it is likely that we'll have non PAC-enabled VMs for quite a while. Thoughts? M. -- Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...