Received: by 2002:a05:6a10:8395:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id n21csp607185pxh; Tue, 9 Nov 2021 16:05:49 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyHagJT0xCKdKn64WyUJDPgBk4mLWFeAtyepZnlQCfIvNhl8zVAPSdNnJA0UGtj/4G7Rych X-Received: by 2002:a50:e141:: with SMTP id i1mr15757040edl.157.1636502748910; Tue, 09 Nov 2021 16:05:48 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1636502748; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=PW70cJOPu5QUcv5kyIB0ZIEwlbOIIvJRm3YcyhMFdzdZXJ3C9QYNw+P/dS48elQLl7 aTZ5O71Sgem8BGkQvVDSam+Rrp+7rbRYAOIDVUE0uVibjie42nrRCYKvP2RUcAYRa9LS MjwvXKmEEojf6z2xkHH2uJ6ompJbQkBGyuM00Cio2wgzyuxKhp6rfCZXafZ/p30n7j5M jf3Ffyn5ZE4QX4xi1UvnCt6Ye9U2at8OxTsCpYOMoZCIV62o8o3XN8KK8vy9MbD9uMQx R/IGSgjnu2mh6LbQKYuuiezBZxVRGI8/x5K+Afb+oOVuI9UB3eoNi/ead95xNZ9gDn1f WSfw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:content-transfer-encoding:content-language :in-reply-to:mime-version:user-agent:date:message-id:from:references :cc:to:subject:dkim-signature; bh=irwTneTf9QI6LVI8ekRzV43VSKxwRrtEsvCyVPgaciQ=; b=IkqRWN+cYX9MF0sqWpARM+Gy89ffaJw/OdlaEZK51D8d+NNjujcAtbzMLBgdpS3Mpm c+ZEKrC28oDuYRh1nAue8c9uwufheWzAO64sL3l2SNaEmXrCNnK0Duv1E8hGXUs49ZxZ Fp5pYJ8kfwigjM+TVfifDzyjEPhsAKHgpnb3qIgz4zwToLi2jh2j09lO1+bvKBgYIKmv m4dCZOclvLUeuxMlpnh0SY7Qqa258KcsXU7Hh72QJCmVltAyYD8k3h9d4jBhep0BmQ6x OlRXXlupDrh5ounHOVqSOqmCVA3+zeh3tbXKJKXtZNGG4zpw35x9LhtYgw6OVEoT75zy 89xw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@redhat.com header.s=mimecast20190719 header.b=b2URQgWp; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=redhat.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id e10si45665457edj.362.2021.11.09.16.05.25; Tue, 09 Nov 2021 16:05:48 -0800 (PST) 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; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@redhat.com header.s=mimecast20190719 header.b=b2URQgWp; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=redhat.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S237497AbhKIPw6 (ORCPT + 97 others); Tue, 9 Nov 2021 10:52:58 -0500 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([216.205.24.124]:50565 "EHLO us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S236482AbhKIPw5 (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 Nov 2021 10:52:57 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1636473010; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=irwTneTf9QI6LVI8ekRzV43VSKxwRrtEsvCyVPgaciQ=; b=b2URQgWpnGZiowwdqLzOX2ryDeX5Py0/xJlUD9SU/Sb0JfkztYXt6ecSoJzLG/XbUyrscM 0vHtddn62HTD+9kXSQt1ZUbFiwDSwzgoA8cgyInX/E/F1vzyprOzU9/BVmgRwBq85k4Vrt oZMaDOMPEIlltfk+H/1NOtuEzNJoHU4= Received: from mail-wr1-f70.google.com (mail-wr1-f70.google.com [209.85.221.70]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-447-DjhHqxxzOi28DKd6cllgbw-1; Tue, 09 Nov 2021 10:50:09 -0500 X-MC-Unique: DjhHqxxzOi28DKd6cllgbw-1 Received: by mail-wr1-f70.google.com with SMTP id h7-20020adfaa87000000b001885269a937so3783251wrc.17 for ; Tue, 09 Nov 2021 07:50:09 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=irwTneTf9QI6LVI8ekRzV43VSKxwRrtEsvCyVPgaciQ=; b=Z7CJ+r2cadYFasAlhXdF85H32HVRjLgfjUjdbd/HKEctmiRfyqEc0IUCKlFbviU+Dm J54K7tdAQcbUF+IjR03o2TZ19mq4z7x6XQw+vywwPhQcUglWdxW4fJUYSbACi4RcSN1o EBYgHuScdmKwkwTGzlP09TIxC1P3qrF78ujA5ByeyJNh7OyESmCal8OEXxxLMN73BkgD nm7sEPu8aPwp4i7JpORm9KgGnYo4KvgAUw9gh/+4d8tN8k5hNhgR1EXeIC2tD8X8LO0a 1pfqCGln5qd/eveuWajxTB+n3Th/vKXgnhaFR6OBjv7wlKzELu2eZ3sK/ABN09ozn1YK L42g== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531rzdFFwHOpVt5o7XWB08dTvH7be7QO4tpAEEj52FSulkjVmMq1 8G1i6TnDGLDIUNVOjJ165s51kK28N98QiZjHAuLDZ7XrL3AWiIHTUpFjaoYFaJoEZdb12T1jFVN ZklnnUmwBAhV61hmpGQNFXrM+ X-Received: by 2002:a05:6000:1841:: with SMTP id c1mr10617530wri.425.1636473008121; Tue, 09 Nov 2021 07:50:08 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 2002:a05:6000:1841:: with SMTP id c1mr10617494wri.425.1636473007893; Tue, 09 Nov 2021 07:50:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?IPv6:2a01:e0a:59e:9d80:527b:9dff:feef:3874? ([2a01:e0a:59e:9d80:527b:9dff:feef:3874]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id a4sm2730083wmg.10.2021.11.09.07.50.06 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 09 Nov 2021 07:50:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 04/21] KVM: arm64: Support SDEI_EVENT_REGISTER hypercall To: Gavin Shan , kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu Cc: maz@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com, pbonzini@redhat.com, will@kernel.org References: <20210815001352.81927-1-gshan@redhat.com> <20210815001352.81927-5-gshan@redhat.com> From: Eric Auger Message-ID: <434349d3-4dcb-9157-35a5-9f05aaed4982@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2021 16:50:05 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.10.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20210815001352.81927-5-gshan@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Gavin, On 8/15/21 2:13 AM, Gavin Shan wrote: > This supports SDEI_EVENT_REGISTER hypercall, which is used by guest > to register SDEI events. The SDEI event won't be raised to the guest > or specific vCPU until it's registered and enabled explicitly. > > Only those events that have been exported by KVM can be registered. > After the event is registered successfully, the KVM SDEI event (object) > is created or updated because the same KVM SDEI event is shared by revisit the terminology (KVM SDEI event). The same SDEI registered event object is shared by multiple vCPUs if it is a private event. > multiple vCPUs if it's a private event.> > Signed-off-by: Gavin Shan > --- > arch/arm64/kvm/sdei.c | 122 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 122 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/sdei.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/sdei.c > index aa9485f076a9..d3ea3eee154b 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/sdei.c > +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/sdei.c > @@ -21,6 +21,20 @@ static struct kvm_sdei_event_state defined_kse[] = { > }, > }; > > +static struct kvm_sdei_event *kvm_sdei_find_event(struct kvm *kvm, > + unsigned long num) > +{ > + struct kvm_sdei_kvm *ksdei = kvm->arch.sdei; > + struct kvm_sdei_event *kse; the 'k' prefix everywhere for your local variable is unneeded. > + > + list_for_each_entry(kse, &ksdei->events, link) { > + if (kse->state.num == num) > + return kse; > + } > + > + return NULL; > +} > + > static void kvm_sdei_remove_events(struct kvm *kvm) > { > struct kvm_sdei_kvm *ksdei = kvm->arch.sdei; > @@ -32,6 +46,20 @@ static void kvm_sdei_remove_events(struct kvm *kvm) > } > } > > +static struct kvm_sdei_kvm_event *kvm_sdei_find_kvm_event(struct kvm *kvm, > + unsigned long num) > +{ > + struct kvm_sdei_kvm *ksdei = kvm->arch.sdei; > + struct kvm_sdei_kvm_event *kske; > + > + list_for_each_entry(kske, &ksdei->kvm_events, link) {> + if (kske->state.num == num) I still don't get the diff between the num of an SDEI event vs the num of a so-called SDEI kvm event. Event numbers are either static or dynamically created using bind ops which you do not support. But to me this is a property of the root exposed SDEI event and not a property of the registered event. Please could you clarify? > + return kske; > + } > + > + return NULL; > +} > + > static void kvm_sdei_remove_kvm_events(struct kvm *kvm, > unsigned int mask, > bool force) > @@ -86,6 +114,98 @@ static unsigned long kvm_sdei_hypercall_version(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > return ret; > } > > +static unsigned long kvm_sdei_hypercall_register(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > +{ > + struct kvm *kvm = vcpu->kvm; > + struct kvm_sdei_kvm *ksdei = kvm->arch.sdei; > + struct kvm_sdei_vcpu *vsdei = vcpu->arch.sdei; > + struct kvm_sdei_event *kse = NULL; > + struct kvm_sdei_kvm_event *kske = NULL; > + unsigned long event_num = smccc_get_arg1(vcpu); > + unsigned long event_entry = smccc_get_arg2(vcpu); > + unsigned long event_param = smccc_get_arg3(vcpu); > + unsigned long route_mode = smccc_get_arg4(vcpu); > + unsigned long route_affinity = smccc_get_arg5(vcpu); > + int index = vcpu->vcpu_idx; > + unsigned long ret = SDEI_SUCCESS; > + > + /* Sanity check */ > + if (!(ksdei && vsdei)) { > + ret = SDEI_NOT_SUPPORTED; > + goto out; > + } > + > + if (!kvm_sdei_is_valid_event_num(event_num)) { > + ret = SDEI_INVALID_PARAMETERS; > + goto out; > + } > + > + if (!(route_mode == SDEI_EVENT_REGISTER_RM_ANY || > + route_mode == SDEI_EVENT_REGISTER_RM_PE)) { > + ret = SDEI_INVALID_PARAMETERS; > + goto out; > + } > + > + /* > + * The KVM event could have been created if it's a private event. > + * We needn't create a KVM event in this case. s/create a KVM event/to create another KVM event instance > + */ > + spin_lock(&ksdei->lock); > + kske = kvm_sdei_find_kvm_event(kvm, event_num); > + if (kske) { > + kse = kske->kse; > + index = (kse->state.type == SDEI_EVENT_TYPE_PRIVATE) ? > + vcpu->vcpu_idx : 0; > + > + if (kvm_sdei_is_registered(kske, index)) { > + ret = SDEI_DENIED; > + goto unlock; > + } > + > + kske->state.route_mode = route_mode; > + kske->state.route_affinity = route_affinity; > + kske->state.entries[index] = event_entry; > + kske->state.params[index] = event_param; > + kvm_sdei_set_registered(kske, index); > + goto unlock; > + } > + > + /* Check if the event number has been registered */ > + kse = kvm_sdei_find_event(kvm, event_num); I don't get the comment. find_event looks up for exposed events and not registered events, right? So maybe this is the first thing to check, ie. the num matches one exposed event. > + if (!kse) { > + ret = SDEI_INVALID_PARAMETERS; > + goto unlock; > + } > + > + /* Create KVM event */ > + kske = kzalloc(sizeof(*kske), GFP_KERNEL); > + if (!kske) { > + ret = SDEI_OUT_OF_RESOURCE; > + goto unlock; > + } > + > + /* Initialize KVM event state */ > + index = (kse->state.type == SDEI_EVENT_TYPE_PRIVATE) ? > + vcpu->vcpu_idx : 0; > + kske->state.num = event_num; > + kske->state.refcount = 0; > + kske->state.route_mode = route_affinity; > + kske->state.route_affinity = route_affinity; > + kske->state.entries[index] = event_entry; > + kske->state.params[index] = event_param; > + kvm_sdei_set_registered(kske, index); > + > + /* Initialize KVM event */ > + kske->kse = kse; > + kske->kvm = kvm; > + list_add_tail(&kske->link, &ksdei->kvm_events); > + > +unlock: > + spin_unlock(&ksdei->lock); > +out: > + return ret; > +} > + > int kvm_sdei_hypercall(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > { > u32 func = smccc_get_function(vcpu); > @@ -97,6 +217,8 @@ int kvm_sdei_hypercall(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > ret = kvm_sdei_hypercall_version(vcpu); > break; > case SDEI_1_0_FN_SDEI_EVENT_REGISTER: > + ret = kvm_sdei_hypercall_register(vcpu); > + break; > case SDEI_1_0_FN_SDEI_EVENT_ENABLE: > case SDEI_1_0_FN_SDEI_EVENT_DISABLE: > case SDEI_1_0_FN_SDEI_EVENT_CONTEXT: > Thanks Eric