Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-194518-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.48.161 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.48.161;
Message-ID: <2dcfc174-9384-4746-833d-1442bcfb6d11@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 29 May 2024 19:35:33 +0200
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/6] KVM: arm64: maintain per VM value for CTR_EL0
Content-Language: en-US
To: Sebastian Ott <sebott@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, kvmarm@lists.linux.dev,
 linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>,
 Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@linux.dev>, James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
 Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
 Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
References: <20240514072252.5657-1-sebott@redhat.com>
 <20240514072252.5657-3-sebott@redhat.com>
 <edbe3039-ed42-432e-8309-5a0a46cc2d5c@redhat.com>
 <90e53cc7-039f-5abc-f94c-cf53a1602a2a@redhat.com>
From: Eric Auger <eauger@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <90e53cc7-039f-5abc-f94c-cf53a1602a2a@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit


On 5/29/24 17:51, Sebastian Ott wrote:
> Hej Eric,
> 
> On Wed, 29 May 2024, Eric Auger wrote:
>>>  static int set_clidr(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, const struct
>>> sys_reg_desc *rd,
>>>                u64 val)
>>>  {
>>> -    u64 ctr_el0 = read_sanitised_ftr_reg(SYS_CTR_EL0);
>>>      u64 idc = !CLIDR_LOC(val) || (!CLIDR_LOUIS(val) &&
>>> !CLIDR_LOUU(val));
>>> +    u64 ctr_el0 = vcpu->kvm->arch.ctr_el0;
>>>
>>>      if ((val & CLIDR_EL1_RES0) || (!(ctr_el0 & CTR_EL0_IDC) && idc))
>>>          return -EINVAL;
>> nit: you may update the function doc comment which the extra handling of
>> CTR_EL0.
> 
> Hm, there's no extra handling of CTR_EL0 it just uses the emulated value.>
>>> @@ -3557,6 +3557,13 @@ void kvm_reset_sys_regs(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>>>      struct kvm *kvm = vcpu->kvm;
>>>      unsigned long i;
>>>
>>> +    if (!kvm_vcpu_initialized(vcpu))
>> at this stage of the reading, why is the above check needed?
> 
> To make sure that a later call to this function doesn't overwrite
> the value provided by userspace. (See e016333745c "KVM: arm64: Only
> reset vCPU-scoped feature ID regs once").
but isn't it overwritten through the .reset=reset_ctr() that is
populated in next patch?

Eric
> 
> Sebastian
>