On Tue, Mar 09, 2021 at 01:26:46PM +0000, Will Deacon wrote: > On Wed, Mar 03, 2021 at 04:45:05PM +0000, Marc Zyngier wrote: > > It recently became apparent that the ARMv8 architecture has interesting > > rules regarding attributes being used when fetching instructions > > if the MMU is off at Stage-1. > > > > In this situation, the CPU is allowed to fetch from the PoC and > > allocate into the I-cache (unless the memory is mapped with > > the XN attribute at Stage-2). > > > > If we transpose this to vcpus sharing a single physical CPU, > > it is possible for a vcpu running with its MMU off to influence > > another vcpu running with its MMU on, as the latter is expected to > > fetch from the PoU (and self-patching code doesn't flush below that > > level). > > > > In order to solve this, reuse the vcpu-private TLB invalidation > > code to apply the same policy to the I-cache, nuking it every time > > the vcpu runs on a physical CPU that ran another vcpu of the same > > VM in the past. > > > > This involve renaming __kvm_tlb_flush_local_vmid() to > > __kvm_flush_cpu_context(), and inserting a local i-cache invalidation > > there. > > > > Cc: [email protected] > > Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier <[email protected]> > > --- > > arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_asm.h | 4 ++-- > > arch/arm64/kvm/arm.c | 7 ++++++- > > arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/nvhe/hyp-main.c | 6 +++--- > > arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/nvhe/tlb.c | 3 ++- > > arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/vhe/tlb.c | 3 ++- > > 5 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) > > Since the FWB discussion doesn't affect the correctness of this patch: > > Acked-by: Will Deacon <[email protected]>
I agree. We can optimise it later for FWB. Acked-by: Catalin Marinas <[email protected]> _______________________________________________ kvmarm mailing list [email protected] https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
