Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20210108121524.656872-1-qperret@google.com> <20210108121524.656872-16-qperret@google.com>
 <CAL_JsqLmzFWmTc=6JSRMofSEVRx9GCrwGxEsYog9dC16EMGdvQ@mail.gmail.com> <X/1xN2UxiUxkzAiN@google.com>
In-Reply-To: <X/1xN2UxiUxkzAiN@google.com>
From:   Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>
Date:   Tue, 12 Jan 2021 08:10:47 -0600
Message-ID: <CAL_Jsq+5d+Ox_-m_Rd83R9xoZb6e2cxCNfbL8YPzKdwj=y0M8Q@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 15/26] of/fdt: Introduce early_init_dt_add_memory_hyp()
To:     Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com>
Cc:     Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
        Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>,
        James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
        Julien Thierry <julien.thierry.kdev@gmail.com>,
        Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
        Frank Rowand <frowand.list@gmail.com>,
        devicetree@vger.kernel.org, android-kvm@google.com,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Android Kernel Team <kernel-team@android.com>,
        "open list:KERNEL VIRTUAL MACHINE FOR ARM64 (KVM/arm64)" 
        <kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu>,
        linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
        Fuad Tabba <tabba@google.com>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
        David Brazdil <dbrazdil@google.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Jan 12, 2021 at 3:51 AM Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com> wrote:
>
> On Monday 11 Jan 2021 at 08:45:10 (-0600), Rob Herring wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 8, 2021 at 6:16 AM Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Introduce early_init_dt_add_memory_hyp() to allow KVM to conserve a copy
> > > of the memory regions parsed from DT. This will be needed in the context
> > > of the protected nVHE feature of KVM/arm64 where the code running at EL2
> > > will be cleanly separated from the host kernel during boot, and will
> > > need its own representation of memory.
> >
> > What happened to doing this with memblock?
>
> I gave it a go, but as mentioned in v1, I ran into issues for nomap
> regions. I want the hypervisor to know about these memory regions (it's
> possible some of those will be given to protected guests for instance)
> but these seem to be entirely removed from the memblocks when using DT:
>
> https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/latest/source/drivers/of/fdt.c#L1153
>
> EFI appears to do things differently, though, as it 'just' uses
> memblock_mark_nomap() instead of actively removing the memblock. And that
> means I could actually use the memblock API for EFI, but I'd rather
> have a common solution. I tried to understand why things are done
> differently but couldn't find an answer and kept things simple and
> working for now.
>
> Is there a good reason for not using memblock_mark_nomap() with DT? If
> not, I'm happy to try that.

There were 2 patches to do that, but it never got resolved. See here[1].

Rob

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-devicetree/?q=s%3Ano-map