On Thu, Nov 28, 2019 at 08:58:05PM +0100, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> @@ -408,6 +410,8 @@ static void __init hyp_mode_check(void)
> "CPU: CPUs started in inconsistent modes");
> else
> pr_info("CPU: All CPU(s) started at EL1\n");
> + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_KVM_ARM_HOST))
> + kvm_compute_layout();
> }
It looks like we call this unconditionally here even if the kernel was
booted at EL1.
> void __init smp_cpus_done(unsigned int max_cpus)
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/va_layout.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/va_layout.c
> index 2cf7d4b606c38..dab1fea4752aa 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/va_layout.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/va_layout.c
> @@ -22,7 +22,7 @@ static u8 tag_lsb;
> static u64 tag_val;
> static u64 va_mask;
>
> -static void compute_layout(void)
> +__init void kvm_compute_layout(void)
> {
> phys_addr_t idmap_addr = __pa_symbol(__hyp_idmap_text_start);
> u64 hyp_va_msb;
> @@ -110,9 +110,6 @@ void __init kvm_update_va_mask(struct alt_instr *alt,
>
> BUG_ON(nr_inst != 5);
>
> - if (!has_vhe() && !va_mask)
> - compute_layout();
> -
> for (i = 0; i < nr_inst; i++) {
> u32 rd, rn, insn, oinsn;
>
> @@ -156,9 +153,6 @@ void kvm_patch_vector_branch(struct alt_instr *alt,
> return;
> }
>
> - if (!va_mask)
> - compute_layout();
And here we had a few more checks.
Maybe it's still correct but asking anyway.
--
Catalin
_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
