On 6 March 2018 at 17:16, Marc Zyngier <marc.zyng...@arm.com> wrote:
> On 06/03/18 16:56, Peter Maydell wrote:
>> On 6 March 2018 at 16:43, Marc Zyngier <marc.zyng...@arm.com> wrote:
>>> On 06/03/18 16:26, Peter Maydell wrote:
>>>> +#define KVM_REG_ARM_SECURE_MASK      0x0000000010000000
>>>> +#define KVM_REG_ARM_SECURE_SHIFT     28
>>>>
>>>>  #define ARM_CP15_REG_SHIFT_MASK(x,n) \
>>>>       (((x) << KVM_REG_ARM_ ## n ## _SHIFT) & KVM_REG_ARM_ ## n ## _MASK)
>>>>
>>>
>>> Don't you also need to define it on the arm64 side?
>>
>> I don't think so, because AArch64 registers aren't security banked
>> (except for some GICv3 ones, which aren't set via GET/SET_ONE_REG.)
>> Or is there a case I'm missing?
>
> There is still the case of AArch32 guests on arm64, for which you'd need
> to replicate the change to arch/arm64/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h. The two
> architectures have different userspace APIs.

I thought that AArch32 guests on arm64 hosts still used the
arm64 GET/SET_ONE_REG registers to set the guest's environment?
The guest's r0-r7 are in what KVM considers X0..X7, etc, and
cp15 registers are accessed by reading/writing their architecturally
mapped AArch64 EL1 counterparts.

thanks
-- PMM
_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm

Reply via email to