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;
Date:   Tue, 30 Mar 2021 15:00:16 +0100
Message-ID: <87ft0crbbj.wl-maz@kernel.org>
From:   Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
To:     Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
Cc:     linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        coresight@lists.linaro.org, mathieu.poirier@linaro.org,
        mike.leach@linaro.org, leo.yan@linaro.org,
        anshuman.khandual@arm.com, catalin.marinas@arm.com,
        Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
        Alexandru Elisei <Alexandru.Elisei@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 07/19] arm64: kvm: Enable access to TRBE support for host
In-Reply-To: <ad570007-404b-0c42-3f8e-fe3c537716be@arm.com>
References: <20210323120647.454211-1-suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
        <20210323120647.454211-8-suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
        <87r1jxq7ax.wl-maz@kernel.org>
        <c87d9dd9-72b2-6730-e3d4-9aaa0370a639@arm.com>
        <87mtukrg6o.wl-maz@kernel.org>
        <ad570007-404b-0c42-3f8e-fe3c537716be@arm.com>
User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) SEMI-EPG/1.14.7 (Harue)
 FLIM-LB/1.14.9 (=?UTF-8?B?R29qxY0=?=) APEL-LB/10.8 EasyPG/1.0.0 Emacs/27.1
 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) MULE/6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO)
MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue")
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, 30 Mar 2021 14:34:23 +0100,
Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com> wrote:
> 
> On 30/03/2021 13:15, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> > On Tue, 30 Mar 2021 12:12:49 +0100,
> > Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com> wrote:

[...]

> >> May be we could do this check at kvm_arch_vcpu_load()/put() ?
> > 
> > That would extend the tracing blackout period enormously, wouldn't it?
> > I'm not sure that's the best thing to do...
> 
> Sorry for not making this clear. We could check if the SPE/TRBE is
> available on this CPU (including the PMB/TRB_IDR bits and a set a flag
> in the VCPU on every kvm_arch_vcpu_load() and cleared on put.
> The actual switching code could check this flag and check if the unit
> is enabled and then do the actual save/restore as we do below.
> (We may be able to even check if unit is enabled there, need to double
> check this.)

Ah, gotcha. Yes, this seems like a reasonable thing to do. We have the
per-vcpu debug flags already, and you could piggy-back on that.

Thanks,

	M.

-- 
Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.