Received: by 2002:a25:8b91:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id j17csp3488867ybl; Fri, 20 Dec 2019 10:07:56 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwgvo5cxblcuYzjBgbok89/UBfMqq3fZtwarabn5fzyI6JK9fbl3J2twezHH2nXG2uulh+3 X-Received: by 2002:a9d:3d0a:: with SMTP id a10mr12807669otc.327.1576865276731; Fri, 20 Dec 2019 10:07:56 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1576865276; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=H8tc8P9p2q4cMtpYghpnycrmgIhNeGTj7AQoCqtJTQH6oOxUi6oz/zSgYhnvcG4t/i TpT1Fzpplh3l3Dyknd1+Xn9zrO6SelbsCkxMWKXvm4QonU+Bul6sRljfMduyI4hPAASO PSvAgdCimrJ7F+zTpYY5OZPgbVrr1QnPp509ICxJswzmm2Er7EedJVcCeUcgbN406WH3 nBGaFj6E0IUE7KcWFxeR5jAtwIeLAeCQQve1vt1O530TM+0nsmwy/cSW4bD/ZXuwGSoj iMLoi5n5IOytySnOWj/R792C2xfxGjKiRt8kKDYIvic9XgMsqAW4MeoIeRYxcm8AxJt4 zn4w== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:user-agent:in-reply-to :content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc :to:from:date; bh=hRIYl1TU6q6CuxhOhjglYWFKLlNcVXgG487fGZjXMYs=; b=Hbtu66SDQD8+RUVqT4b9/AfPl6h4iqrQbU5Zg5dvoz6fCTom4FyvmQ894yBTM4VW16 B4cynX+XCZ00uHoxpGAdPaGaNoFnnuGnkho4S1CfK62dLPkPE5Hh7QH6KY0EspRl9qz5 duTU410p0ybCrwpvwV2v63RTqiFf0QXApKLf46m4tqhnhxEfj+6pKuTvAeKm+JQphtMH SX7HgLaIW51rqTIvhmk56llOHTPxDAzKTrxgFR10HIVtyXajBIOzXB+/W5HEJWyrCk5y 0qP4Lsm32Eb8pbbWUQ4Fepy4HCQacsvkXowF/NgcNzWzRw4F7WLlC3FkICUBiYlNYS1e iHiA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id a205si5288866oii.95.2019.12.20.10.07.43; Fri, 20 Dec 2019 10:07:56 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727451AbfLTSHC (ORCPT + 99 others); Fri, 20 Dec 2019 13:07:02 -0500 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.110.172]:53860 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727391AbfLTSHC (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Dec 2019 13:07:02 -0500 Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 564091FB; Fri, 20 Dec 2019 10:07:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from lakrids.cambridge.arm.com (usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2154B3F67D; Fri, 20 Dec 2019 10:07:00 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2019 18:06:58 +0000 From: Mark Rutland To: Andrew Murray Cc: Marc Zyngier , Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , Sudeep Holla , kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 09/18] arm64: KVM: enable conditional save/restore full SPE profiling buffer controls Message-ID: <20191220180657.GD25258@lakrids.cambridge.arm.com> References: <20191220143025.33853-1-andrew.murray@arm.com> <20191220143025.33853-10-andrew.murray@arm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20191220143025.33853-10-andrew.murray@arm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.11.1+11 (2f07cb52) (2018-12-01) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Dec 20, 2019 at 02:30:16PM +0000, Andrew Murray wrote: > From: Sudeep Holla > > Now that we can save/restore the full SPE controls, we can enable it > if SPE is setup and ready to use in KVM. It's supported in KVM only if > all the CPUs in the system supports SPE. > > However to support heterogenous systems, we need to move the check if > host supports SPE and do a partial save/restore. I don't think that it makes sense to support this for heterogeneous systems, given their SPE capabilities and IMP DEF details will differ. Is there some way we can limit this to homogeneous systems? Thanks, Mark. > > Signed-off-by: Sudeep Holla > Signed-off-by: Andrew Murray > --- > arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/debug-sr.c | 33 ++++++++++++++++----------------- > include/kvm/arm_spe.h | 6 ++++++ > 2 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/debug-sr.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/debug-sr.c > index 12429b212a3a..d8d857067e6d 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/debug-sr.c > +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/debug-sr.c > @@ -86,18 +86,13 @@ > } > > static void __hyp_text > -__debug_save_spe_nvhe(struct kvm_cpu_context *ctxt, bool full_ctxt) > +__debug_save_spe_context(struct kvm_cpu_context *ctxt, bool full_ctxt) > { > u64 reg; > > /* Clear pmscr in case of early return */ > ctxt->sys_regs[PMSCR_EL1] = 0; > > - /* SPE present on this CPU? */ > - if (!cpuid_feature_extract_unsigned_field(read_sysreg(id_aa64dfr0_el1), > - ID_AA64DFR0_PMSVER_SHIFT)) > - return; > - > /* Yes; is it owned by higher EL? */ > reg = read_sysreg_s(SYS_PMBIDR_EL1); > if (reg & BIT(SYS_PMBIDR_EL1_P_SHIFT)) > @@ -142,7 +137,7 @@ __debug_save_spe_nvhe(struct kvm_cpu_context *ctxt, bool full_ctxt) > } > > static void __hyp_text > -__debug_restore_spe_nvhe(struct kvm_cpu_context *ctxt, bool full_ctxt) > +__debug_restore_spe_context(struct kvm_cpu_context *ctxt, bool full_ctxt) > { > if (!ctxt->sys_regs[PMSCR_EL1]) > return; > @@ -210,11 +205,14 @@ void __hyp_text __debug_restore_guest_context(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > struct kvm_guest_debug_arch *host_dbg; > struct kvm_guest_debug_arch *guest_dbg; > > + host_ctxt = kern_hyp_va(vcpu->arch.host_cpu_context); > + guest_ctxt = &vcpu->arch.ctxt; > + > + __debug_restore_spe_context(guest_ctxt, kvm_arm_spe_v1_ready(vcpu)); > + > if (!(vcpu->arch.flags & KVM_ARM64_DEBUG_DIRTY)) > return; > > - host_ctxt = kern_hyp_va(vcpu->arch.host_cpu_context); > - guest_ctxt = &vcpu->arch.ctxt; > host_dbg = &vcpu->arch.host_debug_state.regs; > guest_dbg = kern_hyp_va(vcpu->arch.debug_ptr); > > @@ -232,8 +230,7 @@ void __hyp_text __debug_restore_host_context(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > host_ctxt = kern_hyp_va(vcpu->arch.host_cpu_context); > guest_ctxt = &vcpu->arch.ctxt; > > - if (!has_vhe()) > - __debug_restore_spe_nvhe(host_ctxt, false); > + __debug_restore_spe_context(host_ctxt, kvm_arm_spe_v1_ready(vcpu)); > > if (!(vcpu->arch.flags & KVM_ARM64_DEBUG_DIRTY)) > return; > @@ -249,19 +246,21 @@ void __hyp_text __debug_restore_host_context(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > > void __hyp_text __debug_save_host_context(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > { > - /* > - * Non-VHE: Disable and flush SPE data generation > - * VHE: The vcpu can run, but it can't hide. > - */ > struct kvm_cpu_context *host_ctxt; > > host_ctxt = kern_hyp_va(vcpu->arch.host_cpu_context); > - if (!has_vhe()) > - __debug_save_spe_nvhe(host_ctxt, false); > + if (cpuid_feature_extract_unsigned_field(read_sysreg(id_aa64dfr0_el1), > + ID_AA64DFR0_PMSVER_SHIFT)) > + __debug_save_spe_context(host_ctxt, kvm_arm_spe_v1_ready(vcpu)); > } > > void __hyp_text __debug_save_guest_context(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > { > + bool kvm_spe_ready = kvm_arm_spe_v1_ready(vcpu); > + > + /* SPE present on this vCPU? */ > + if (kvm_spe_ready) > + __debug_save_spe_context(&vcpu->arch.ctxt, kvm_spe_ready); > } > > u32 __hyp_text __kvm_get_mdcr_el2(void) > diff --git a/include/kvm/arm_spe.h b/include/kvm/arm_spe.h > index 48d118fdb174..30c40b1bc385 100644 > --- a/include/kvm/arm_spe.h > +++ b/include/kvm/arm_spe.h > @@ -16,4 +16,10 @@ struct kvm_spe { > bool irq_level; > }; > > +#ifdef CONFIG_KVM_ARM_SPE > +#define kvm_arm_spe_v1_ready(v) ((v)->arch.spe.ready) > +#else > +#define kvm_arm_spe_v1_ready(v) (false) > +#endif /* CONFIG_KVM_ARM_SPE */ > + > #endif /* __ASM_ARM_KVM_SPE_H */ > -- > 2.21.0 >