Hi Mark,
On 20/10/17 17:27, Mark Rutland wrote:
> Hi Marc,
>
> On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 04:48:58PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>> @@ -181,18 +185,40 @@ static inline void
>> __invalidate_icache_guest_page(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
>> return;
>> }
>>
>> - /* PIPT cache. As for the d-side, use a temporary kernel mapping. */
>> + /*
>> + * CTR IminLine contains Log2 of the number of words in the
>> + * cache line, so we can get the number of words as
>> + * 2 << (IminLine - 1). To get the number of bytes, we
>> + * multiply by 4 (the number of bytes in a 32-bit word), and
>> + * get 4 << (IminLine).
>> + */
>> + iclsz = 4 << (read_cpuid(CPUID_CACHETYPE) & 0xf);
>> +
>> while (size) {
>> void *va = kmap_atomic_pfn(pfn);
>> + void *end = va + PAGE_SIZE;
>> + void *addr = va;
>>
>> - __cpuc_coherent_user_range((unsigned long)va,
>> - (unsigned long)va + PAGE_SIZE);
>> + do {
>> + write_sysreg(addr, ICIMVAU);
>> + addr += iclsz;
>> + } while (addr < end);
>> +
>> + dsb(ishst);
>
> I believe this needs to be ISH rather than ISHST.
>
> Per, ARM DDI 0487B.b, page G3-4701, "G3.4 AArch32 cache and branch
> predictor support":
>
> A DSB or DMB instruction intended to ensure the completion of cache
> maintenance instructions or branch predictor instructions must have
> an access type of both loads and stores.
Right. This actually comes from 6abdd491698a ("ARM: mm: use
inner-shareable barriers for TLB and user cache operations"), and the
ARMv7 ARM doesn't mention any of this.
My take is that we want to be consistent. Given that KVM/ARM on 32bit is
basically ARMv7 only, I'd rather keep the ST version of the barrier
here, and change it everywhere if/when someone decides to support a
32bit kernel on ARMv8 (yes, we already do as a guest, but it doesn't
seem to really matter so far).
Thoughts?
M.
--
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...
_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
