Re: [PATCH v4 2/9] virt: geniezone: Add GenieZone hypervisor support

On 7/21/2023 1:46 AM, Yi-De Wu (吳一德) wrote:

On Fri, 2023-06-09 at 17:22 +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:

quoted

  	
External email : Please do not click links or open attachments until
you have verified the sender or the content.
  On 09/06/2023 10:52, Yi-De Wu wrote:

quoted

From: "Yingshiuan Pan" <redacted>

GenieZone is MediaTek hypervisor solution, and it is running in EL2
stand alone as a type-I hypervisor. This patch exports a set of

ioctl

quoted

interfaces for userspace VMM (e.g., crosvm) to operate guest VMs
lifecycle (creation and destroy) on GenieZone.

...

quoted

+static int gzvm_drv_probe(void)
+{
+int ret;
+
+if (gzvm_arch_probe() != 0) {
+pr_err("Not found available conduit\n");
+return -ENODEV;
+}
+
+ret = misc_register(&gzvm_dev);
+if (ret)
+return ret;
+gzvm_debug_dev = &gzvm_dev;
+
+return 0;
+}
+
+static int gzvm_drv_remove(void)
+{
+destroy_all_vm();
+misc_deregister(&gzvm_dev);
+return 0;
+}
+
+static int gzvm_dev_init(void)
+{
+return gzvm_drv_probe();

So for every system and architecture you want to: probe, run some SMC
and then print error that it is not othe system you wanted.

I don't think this is what we want. You basically pollute all of
other
users just to have your hypervisor guest additions...


Best regards,
Krzysztof

hi Krzysztof,

After some back-and-forth discussion[1][2][3][4][5], we'd like to bring
bakc all the attension of related issues in this thread.

We're going to restore the dt solution on our next version, which means
we would maintain a simple dt for discovering the hypervisor node and
probe for the status of the device when needed.

.. see the comment below.

The reasons are listed below for the record.
- Although dt is for hardware, it's difficult to discover a specific
hypervisor without probing on all subsystem and thus pollute all of
other users[4] as a consequence.

I don't understand. Patches will help here to understand what exactly 
you are referring here.

- The GenieZone hypervisor could be considered as a vendor model to
assist platform virtualization whose implementation is independent from
Linuxism.

Then why we are adding this hypervisor support in Linux?

Please let us if there're any other concerns.

Reference

[1]
https://android-review.googlesource.com/c/kernel/common/+/2447547/comment/495502f3_bb52344b/

Why we look at the ACK patches here on the LKML? Please submit them here 
if you would like to discuss and review?

---Trilok Soni



_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel