Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-52993-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45e3:2400::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:45e3:2400::1;
Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2024 16:05:21 +0000
From: Sebastian Ene <sebastianene@google.com>
To: Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@linux.dev>
Cc: will@kernel.org, James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
	Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
	Zenghui Yu <yuzenghui@huawei.com>, catalin.marinas@arm.com,
	mark.rutland@arm.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, maz@kernel.org,
	kvmarm@lists.linux.dev, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@android.com,
	vdonnefort@google.com, qperret@google.com, smostafa@google.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 02/10] KVM: arm64: Add ptdump registration with
 debugfs for the stage-2 pagetables
Message-ID: <ZcEHQSFx4gNh4yMm@google.com>
References: <20231218135859.2513568-2-sebastianene@google.com>
 <20231218135859.2513568-4-sebastianene@google.com>
 <ZYSAfORj2-cXo5t_@linux.dev>
 <Zbt-leieTD64ZefR@google.com>
 <ZcDfM2VRiTETM04I@linux.dev>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <ZcDfM2VRiTETM04I@linux.dev>

On Mon, Feb 05, 2024 at 01:14:27PM +0000, Oliver Upton wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 01, 2024 at 11:20:53AM +0000, Sebastian Ene wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 21, 2023 at 06:14:20PM +0000, Oliver Upton wrote:
> > 
> > Hi Oliver,
> > 
> > I am planning to split the series based on your suggestion and I
> > wanted to make sure that I understand your feedback.
> > 
> > > On Mon, Dec 18, 2023 at 01:58:52PM +0000, Sebastian Ene wrote:
> > > > +config PTDUMP_STAGE2_DEBUGFS
> > > > +       bool "Present the stage-2 pagetables to debugfs"
> > > > +       depends on PTDUMP_DEBUGFS && KVM
> > > > +       default n
> > > > +       help
> > > > +         Say Y here if you want to show the stage-2 kernel pagetables
> > > > +         layout in a debugfs file. This information is only useful for kernel developers
> > > > +         who are working in architecture specific areas of the kernel.
> > > > +         It is probably not a good idea to enable this feature in a production
> > > > +         kernel.
> > > 
> > > It isn't really a good idea to mount debugfs at all in a production
> > > system. There are already plenty worse interfaces lurking in that
> > > filesystem. The pKVM portions already depend on CONFIG_NVHE_EL2_DEBUG,
> > > so I don't see a need for this Kconfig option.
> > > 
> > 
> > I created a separate option because I wanted to re-use the parsing
> > functionality from the already existing ptdump code for EL1. This option
> > is turned off in production and only enabled for debug.
> > 
> > I was thinking to make use of the `CONFIG_NVHE_EL2_DEBUG` but then I abandoned 
> > this ideea as one can use ptdump for vHE as well.
> 
> Fair enough. I was going to say we could just have KVM follow
> CONFIG_PTDUMP_DEBUGFS, but it doesn't matter either way.
> 
> > > > +void kvm_ptdump_register_host(void)
> > > > +{
> > > > +	if (!is_protected_kvm_enabled())
> > > > +		return;
> > > > +
> > > > +	kvm_ptdump_debugfs_register(&host_reg, "host_page_tables",
> > > > +				    kvm_debugfs_dir);
> > > > +}
> > > > +
> > > > +static int __init kvm_host_ptdump_init(void)
> > > > +{
> > > > +	host_reg.priv = (void *)host_s2_pgtable_pages();
> > > > +	return 0;
> > > > +}
> > > > +
> > > > +device_initcall(kvm_host_ptdump_init);
> > > 
> > > Why can't all of this be called from finalize_pkvm()?
> > > 
> > 
> > I guess it can be called from finalize_pkvm before the is_protected_kvm_enabled
> > check. This should work for nvhe & vhe as well.
> 
> What does nvhe and vhe modes have to do with it? I thought this was for
> hooking up the host's S2, which does not exist outside protected mode.
> 

True I guess there is no other need for the initialization portion in
this function. I will split the series to address the non-protected
support first.

Thanks,
Seb

> -- 
> Thanks,
> Oliver