Thread (23 messages) 23 messages, 3 authors, 2021-06-24

Re: [PATCH v17 4/6] KVM: arm64: Expose KVM_ARM_CAP_MTE

From: Fuad Tabba <hidden>
Date: 2021-06-22 08:08:35
Also in: kvmarm, lkml, qemu-devel

Hi,

On Mon, Jun 21, 2021 at 12:18 PM Steven Price [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
It's now safe for the VMM to enable MTE in a guest, so expose the
capability to user space.

Reviewed-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
Signed-off-by: Steven Price <steven.price@arm.com>
---
 arch/arm64/kvm/arm.c      | 9 +++++++++
 arch/arm64/kvm/reset.c    | 4 ++++
 arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c | 3 +++
 3 files changed, 16 insertions(+)
diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/arm.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/arm.c
index e720148232a0..28ce26a68f09 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/kvm/arm.c
+++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/arm.c
@@ -93,6 +93,12 @@ int kvm_vm_ioctl_enable_cap(struct kvm *kvm,
                r = 0;
                kvm->arch.return_nisv_io_abort_to_user = true;
                break;
+       case KVM_CAP_ARM_MTE:
+               if (!system_supports_mte() || kvm->created_vcpus)
+                       return -EINVAL;
+               r = 0;
+               kvm->arch.mte_enabled = true;
+               break;
        default:
                r = -EINVAL;
                break;
@@ -237,6 +243,9 @@ int kvm_vm_ioctl_check_extension(struct kvm *kvm, long ext)
                 */
                r = 1;
                break;
+       case KVM_CAP_ARM_MTE:
+               r = system_supports_mte();
+               break;
        case KVM_CAP_STEAL_TIME:
                r = kvm_arm_pvtime_supported();
                break;
diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/reset.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/reset.c
index d37ebee085cf..9e6922b9503a 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/kvm/reset.c
+++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/reset.c
@@ -244,6 +244,10 @@ int kvm_reset_vcpu(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
        switch (vcpu->arch.target) {
        default:
                if (test_bit(KVM_ARM_VCPU_EL1_32BIT, vcpu->arch.features)) {
+                       if (vcpu->kvm->arch.mte_enabled) {
+                               ret = -EINVAL;
+                               goto out;
+                       }
                        pstate = VCPU_RESET_PSTATE_SVC;
                } else {
                        pstate = VCPU_RESET_PSTATE_EL1;
nit: I was wondering whether this check would be better suited in
kvm_vcpu_set_target, rather than here (kvm_reset_vcpu). kvm_reset_vcpu
is called by kvm_vcpu_set_target, but kvm_vcpu_set_target is where
checking for supported features happens. It might be better to group
all such checks together. I don't think that there is any risk of this
feature being toggled by the other call path to kvm_reset_vcpu (via
check_vcpu_requests).

Cheers,
/fuad
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c
index 5c75b24eae21..f6f126eb6ac1 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c
+++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c
@@ -1312,6 +1312,9 @@ static bool access_ccsidr(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct sys_reg_params *p,
 static unsigned int mte_visibility(const struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
                                   const struct sys_reg_desc *rd)
 {
+       if (kvm_has_mte(vcpu->kvm))
+               return 0;
+
        return REG_HIDDEN;
 }

--
2.20.1

_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help