On 10/12/2018 10:13, Christoffer Dall wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 06, 2018 at 05:31:20PM +0000, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>> An SVE system is so far the only case where we mandate VHE. As we're
>> starting to grow this requirements, let's slightly rework the way we
>> deal with that situation, allowing for easy extension of this check.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier <[email protected]>
>> ---
>> arch/arm/include/asm/kvm_host.h | 2 +-
>> arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h | 6 +++---
>> virt/kvm/arm/arm.c | 8 ++++----
>> 3 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm/include/asm/kvm_host.h
>> b/arch/arm/include/asm/kvm_host.h
>> index 5ca5d9af0c26..2184d9ddb418 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm/include/asm/kvm_host.h
>> +++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/kvm_host.h
>> @@ -285,7 +285,7 @@ void kvm_mmu_wp_memory_region(struct kvm *kvm, int slot);
>>
>> struct kvm_vcpu *kvm_mpidr_to_vcpu(struct kvm *kvm, unsigned long mpidr);
>>
>> -static inline bool kvm_arch_check_sve_has_vhe(void) { return true; }
>> +static inline bool kvm_arch_requires_vhe(void) { return false; }
>> static inline void kvm_arch_hardware_unsetup(void) {}
>> static inline void kvm_arch_sync_events(struct kvm *kvm) {}
>> static inline void kvm_arch_vcpu_uninit(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) {}
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h
>> b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h
>> index 52fbc823ff8c..d6d9aa76a943 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h
>> @@ -422,7 +422,7 @@ static inline void __cpu_init_hyp_mode(phys_addr_t
>> pgd_ptr,
>> }
>> }
>>
>> -static inline bool kvm_arch_check_sve_has_vhe(void)
>> +static inline bool kvm_arch_requires_vhe(void)
>> {
>> /*
>> * The Arm architecture specifies that implementation of SVE
>> @@ -430,9 +430,9 @@ static inline bool kvm_arch_check_sve_has_vhe(void)
>> * relies on this when SVE is present:
>> */
>> if (system_supports_sve())
>> - return has_vhe();
>> - else
>> return true;
>> +
>> + return false;
>> }
>>
>> static inline void kvm_arch_hardware_unsetup(void) {}
>> diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/arm.c b/virt/kvm/arm/arm.c
>> index 23774970c9df..1db4c15edcdd 100644
>> --- a/virt/kvm/arm/arm.c
>> +++ b/virt/kvm/arm/arm.c
>> @@ -1640,8 +1640,10 @@ int kvm_arch_init(void *opaque)
>> return -ENODEV;
>> }
>>
>> - if (!kvm_arch_check_sve_has_vhe()) {
>> - kvm_pr_unimpl("SVE system without VHE unsupported. Broken
>> cpu?");
>> + in_hyp_mode = is_kernel_in_hyp_mode();
>> +
>> + if (!in_hyp_mode && kvm_arch_requires_vhe()) {
>> + kvm_pr_unimpl("CPU requiring VHE was booted in non-VHE mode");
>
> nit: The error message feels weird to me (are we reporting CPU bugs?)
> and I'm not sure about the unimpl and I think there's a linse space
> missing.
>
> How about:
>
> kvm_err("Cannot support this CPU in non-VHE mode, not initializing\n");
Yup, works for me. Will, do you mind changing this message for me?
>
> If we wanted to be super helpful, we could expand
> kvm_arch_requires_vhe() with a print statement saying:
>
> kvm_err("SVE detected, requiring VHE mode\n");
>
> But thay may be overkill.
I started with that, but having kvm_pr*() in an include file has proved
to be challenging, so I decided to spend my time on something more
useful and quickly gave up... :-/
>
>
>> return -ENODEV;
>> }
>>
>> @@ -1657,8 +1659,6 @@ int kvm_arch_init(void *opaque)
>> if (err)
>> return err;
>>
>> - in_hyp_mode = is_kernel_in_hyp_mode();
>> -
>> if (!in_hyp_mode) {
>> err = init_hyp_mode();
>> if (err)
>> --
>> 2.19.2
>>
>
> Otherwise:
>
> Acked-by: Christoffer Dall <[email protected]>
>
Thanks,
M.
--
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...
_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
