arm64.nompam skips the MPAM2_EL2 and MPAMHCR_EL2 writes in
finalise_el2_state and leaves the ARM64_MPAM cpucap unset. Where EL3
firmware has cleared MPAM3_EL3.TRAPLOWER, the EL2 trap controls are
left unwritten, at reset values that are UNKNOWN, and KVM still hides
MPAM from the guest but no longer enables the traps that stop a guest
from using it. KVM never saves or restores MPAM0_EL1 and MPAM1_EL1, so
what one guest writes reaches the next guest and the host. Nor can the
kernel make the EL2 writes unconditionally: they trap to EL3 on the
firmware the option exists for, and TRAPLOWER cannot be read below EL3.
Say so in mpam.rst, and add the rule and a pointer to the
kernel-parameters entry.
Suggested-by: Ben Horgan <ben.horgan@arm.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/CA+EHjTxeWxZiuSmnKLGLxTBXP4oJT7-LuffbPAyCSZZ5TW=5Ew@mail.gmail.com/
Signed-off-by: Fuad Tabba <fuad.tabba@linux.dev>
---
Notes:
Changes since v1, the first three from Ben Horgan's review:
- Put arm64.nompam under a new "Command line parameters" section.
- Separate MPAM3_EL3.MPAMEN from TRAPLOWER, which v1 conflated.
- Add that KVM does not save or restore MPAM0_EL1 and MPAM1_EL1.
- Drop "No functional change intended." from the commit message.
Bradley Morgan's Reviewed-by on v1 is not carried over: both
paragraphs, the section heading and the commit message changed.
v1: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260903084809.2027326-1-fuad.tabba@linux.dev/
.../admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt | 3 ++-
Documentation/arch/arm64/mpam.rst | 25 +++++++++++++++++++
2 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
@@ -575,7 +575,8 @@ Kernel parameters Set instructions support arm64.nompam [ARM64] Unconditionally disable Memory Partitioning And- Monitoring support+ Monitoring support. Only for a machine that does not+ boot without it. See Documentation/arch/arm64/mpam.rst arm64.nomte [ARM64] Unconditionally disable Memory Tagging Extension support
@@ -87,6 +87,31 @@ The supported features are: MBWU monitors can be exposed to the user after support for more monitoring scopes is added to resctrl.+Command line parameters+=======================++arm64.nompam+------------+Firmware controls MPAM through two bits of MPAM3_EL3. MPAMEN enables+it: while set, the PARTID and PMG in the MPAMn_ELx registers label the+CPU's memory requests. TRAPLOWER, which resets to 1, traps accesses to+the MPAM system registers from the lower exception levels to EL3.+Firmware must clear it, or handle the trap and emulate MPAM as disabled.+Where it does neither, the CPUs still advertise MPAM in the ID registers,+the kernel's MPAM register accesses trap to EL3, and the boot fails.+``arm64.nompam`` exists for that firmware: it makes the kernel treat the+CPUs as not implementing MPAM, so no MPAM system register is accessed.+Set it only on a machine that does not boot without it.++It is not a way to turn MPAM off. Where firmware has cleared TRAPLOWER,+the option leaves the trap controls in MPAM2_EL2 and MPAMHCR_EL2+unwritten, and their reset values are UNKNOWN. KVM still hides MPAM from+guests but no longer enables the traps that stop a guest from using it,+so a guest may be able to read and write MPAM0_EL1 and MPAM1_EL1. KVM+does not save or restore them, so what one guest writes is still there+when the next guest runs on that CPU, and when the host does. With MPAMEN+set, EL0 and EL1 requests then carry that PARTID and PMG.+ Reporting Bugs ============== If you are not seeing the counters or controls you expect please share the
From: Bradley Morgan <hidden> Date: 2026-09-04 10:35:59
On 4 September 2026 11:31:31 BST, Fuad Tabba [off-list ref] wrote:
arm64.nompam skips the MPAM2_EL2 and MPAMHCR_EL2 writes in
finalise_el2_state and leaves the ARM64_MPAM cpucap unset. Where EL3
firmware has cleared MPAM3_EL3.TRAPLOWER, the EL2 trap controls are
left unwritten, at reset values that are UNKNOWN, and KVM still hides
MPAM from the guest but no longer enables the traps that stop a guest
from using it. KVM never saves or restores MPAM0_EL1 and MPAM1_EL1, so
what one guest writes reaches the next guest and the host. Nor can the
kernel make the EL2 writes unconditionally: they trap to EL3 on the
firmware the option exists for, and TRAPLOWER cannot be read below EL3.
Say so in mpam.rst, and add the rule and a pointer to the
kernel-parameters entry.
Suggested-by: Ben Horgan <ben.horgan@arm.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/CA+EHjTxeWxZiuSmnKLGLxTBXP4oJT7-LuffbPAyCSZZ5TW=5Ew@mail.gmail.com/
Signed-off-by: Fuad Tabba <fuad.tabba@linux.dev>
---
Notes:
Changes since v1, the first three from Ben Horgan's review:
- Put arm64.nompam under a new "Command line parameters" section.
- Separate MPAM3_EL3.MPAMEN from TRAPLOWER, which v1 conflated.
- Add that KVM does not save or restore MPAM0_EL1 and MPAM1_EL1.
- Drop "No functional change intended." from the commit message.
Bradley Morgan's Reviewed-by on v1 is not carried over: both
paragraphs, the section heading and the commit message changed.
Still LGTM, the only arm device I own is pixel 7, and also a modern arm
test-peoples-crap box. So from what I recall, my tag stands
Set instructions support
arm64.nompam [ARM64] Unconditionally disable Memory Partitioning And
- Monitoring support
+ Monitoring support. Only for a machine that does not
+ boot without it. See Documentation/arch/arm64/mpam.rst
arm64.nomte [ARM64] Unconditionally disable Memory Tagging Extension
support
@@ -87,6 +87,31 @@ The supported features are: MBWU monitors can be exposed to the user after support for more monitoring scopes is added to resctrl.+Command line parameters+=======================++arm64.nompam+------------+Firmware controls MPAM through two bits of MPAM3_EL3. MPAMEN enables+it: while set, the PARTID and PMG in the MPAMn_ELx registers label the+CPU's memory requests. TRAPLOWER, which resets to 1, traps accesses to+the MPAM system registers from the lower exception levels to EL3.+Firmware must clear it, or handle the trap and emulate MPAM as disabled.+Where it does neither, the CPUs still advertise MPAM in the ID registers,+the kernel's MPAM register accesses trap to EL3, and the boot fails.+``arm64.nompam`` exists for that firmware: it makes the kernel treat the+CPUs as not implementing MPAM, so no MPAM system register is accessed.+Set it only on a machine that does not boot without it.++It is not a way to turn MPAM off. Where firmware has cleared TRAPLOWER,+the option leaves the trap controls in MPAM2_EL2 and MPAMHCR_EL2+unwritten, and their reset values are UNKNOWN. KVM still hides MPAM from+guests but no longer enables the traps that stop a guest from using it,+so a guest may be able to read and write MPAM0_EL1 and MPAM1_EL1. KVM+does not save or restore them, so what one guest writes is still there+when the next guest runs on that CPU, and when the host does. With MPAMEN+set, EL0 and EL1 requests then carry that PARTID and PMG.+
Reporting Bugs
==============
If you are not seeing the counters or controls you expect please share
the
From: Ben Horgan <ben.horgan@arm.com> Date: 2026-09-07 09:44:39
Hi Fuad,
On 04/09/2026 11:31, Fuad Tabba wrote:
quoted hunk
arm64.nompam skips the MPAM2_EL2 and MPAMHCR_EL2 writes in
finalise_el2_state and leaves the ARM64_MPAM cpucap unset. Where EL3
firmware has cleared MPAM3_EL3.TRAPLOWER, the EL2 trap controls are
left unwritten, at reset values that are UNKNOWN, and KVM still hides
MPAM from the guest but no longer enables the traps that stop a guest
from using it. KVM never saves or restores MPAM0_EL1 and MPAM1_EL1, so
what one guest writes reaches the next guest and the host. Nor can the
kernel make the EL2 writes unconditionally: they trap to EL3 on the
firmware the option exists for, and TRAPLOWER cannot be read below EL3.
Say so in mpam.rst, and add the rule and a pointer to the
kernel-parameters entry.
Suggested-by: Ben Horgan <ben.horgan@arm.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/CA+EHjTxeWxZiuSmnKLGLxTBXP4oJT7-LuffbPAyCSZZ5TW=5Ew@mail.gmail.com/
Signed-off-by: Fuad Tabba <fuad.tabba@linux.dev>
---
Notes:
Changes since v1, the first three from Ben Horgan's review:
- Put arm64.nompam under a new "Command line parameters" section.
- Separate MPAM3_EL3.MPAMEN from TRAPLOWER, which v1 conflated.
- Add that KVM does not save or restore MPAM0_EL1 and MPAM1_EL1.
- Drop "No functional change intended." from the commit message.
Bradley Morgan's Reviewed-by on v1 is not carried over: both
paragraphs, the section heading and the commit message changed.
v1: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260903084809.2027326-1-fuad.tabba@linux.dev/
.../admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt | 3 ++-
Documentation/arch/arm64/mpam.rst | 25 +++++++++++++++++++
2 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
@@ -575,7 +575,8 @@ Kernel parameters Set instructions support arm64.nompam [ARM64] Unconditionally disable Memory Partitioning And- Monitoring support+ Monitoring support. Only for a machine that does not+ boot without it. See Documentation/arch/arm64/mpam.rst arm64.nomte [ARM64] Unconditionally disable Memory Tagging Extension support
@@ -87,6 +87,31 @@ The supported features are: MBWU monitors can be exposed to the user after support for more monitoring scopes is added to resctrl.+Command line parameters+=======================++arm64.nompam+------------+Firmware controls MPAM through two bits of MPAM3_EL3. MPAMEN enables+it: while set, the PARTID and PMG in the MPAMn_ELx registers label the+CPU's memory requests. TRAPLOWER, which resets to 1, traps accesses to+the MPAM system registers from the lower exception levels to EL3.+Firmware must clear it, or handle the trap and emulate MPAM as disabled.+Where it does neither, the CPUs still advertise MPAM in the ID registers,+the kernel's MPAM register accesses trap to EL3, and the boot fails.+``arm64.nompam`` exists for that firmware: it makes the kernel treat the+CPUs as not implementing MPAM, so no MPAM system register is accessed.+Set it only on a machine that does not boot without it.++It is not a way to turn MPAM off. Where firmware has cleared TRAPLOWER,+the option leaves the trap controls in MPAM2_EL2 and MPAMHCR_EL2+unwritten, and their reset values are UNKNOWN. KVM still hides MPAM from+guests but no longer enables the traps that stop a guest from using it,+so a guest may be able to read and write MPAM0_EL1 and MPAM1_EL1. KVM
+does not save or restore them, so what one guest writes is still there+when the next guest runs on that CPU, and when the host does. With MPAMEN+set, EL0 and EL1 requests then carry that PARTID and PMG.+ Reporting Bugs ============== If you are not seeing the counters or controls you expect please share the
Hi Ben,
On Mon, 7 Sept 2026 at 10:44, Ben Horgan [off-list ref] wrote:
Hi Fuad,
On 04/09/2026 11:31, Fuad Tabba wrote:
quoted
arm64.nompam skips the MPAM2_EL2 and MPAMHCR_EL2 writes in
finalise_el2_state and leaves the ARM64_MPAM cpucap unset. Where EL3
firmware has cleared MPAM3_EL3.TRAPLOWER, the EL2 trap controls are
left unwritten, at reset values that are UNKNOWN, and KVM still hides
MPAM from the guest but no longer enables the traps that stop a guest
from using it. KVM never saves or restores MPAM0_EL1 and MPAM1_EL1, so
what one guest writes reaches the next guest and the host. Nor can the
kernel make the EL2 writes unconditionally: they trap to EL3 on the
firmware the option exists for, and TRAPLOWER cannot be read below EL3.
Say so in mpam.rst, and add the rule and a pointer to the
kernel-parameters entry.
Suggested-by: Ben Horgan <ben.horgan@arm.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/CA+EHjTxeWxZiuSmnKLGLxTBXP4oJT7-LuffbPAyCSZZ5TW=5Ew@mail.gmail.com/
Signed-off-by: Fuad Tabba <fuad.tabba@linux.dev>
---
Notes:
Changes since v1, the first three from Ben Horgan's review:
- Put arm64.nompam under a new "Command line parameters" section.
- Separate MPAM3_EL3.MPAMEN from TRAPLOWER, which v1 conflated.
- Add that KVM does not save or restore MPAM0_EL1 and MPAM1_EL1.
- Drop "No functional change intended." from the commit message.
Bradley Morgan's Reviewed-by on v1 is not carried over: both
paragraphs, the section heading and the commit message changed.
v1: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260903084809.2027326-1-fuad.tabba@linux.dev/
.../admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt | 3 ++-
Documentation/arch/arm64/mpam.rst | 25 +++++++++++++++++++
2 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
@@ -575,7 +575,8 @@ Kernel parameters Set instructions support arm64.nompam [ARM64] Unconditionally disable Memory Partitioning And- Monitoring support+ Monitoring support. Only for a machine that does not+ boot without it. See Documentation/arch/arm64/mpam.rst arm64.nomte [ARM64] Unconditionally disable Memory Tagging Extension support
@@ -87,6 +87,31 @@ The supported features are: MBWU monitors can be exposed to the user after support for more monitoring scopes is added to resctrl.+Command line parameters+=======================++arm64.nompam+------------+Firmware controls MPAM through two bits of MPAM3_EL3. MPAMEN enables+it: while set, the PARTID and PMG in the MPAMn_ELx registers label the+CPU's memory requests. TRAPLOWER, which resets to 1, traps accesses to+the MPAM system registers from the lower exception levels to EL3.+Firmware must clear it, or handle the trap and emulate MPAM as disabled.+Where it does neither, the CPUs still advertise MPAM in the ID registers,+the kernel's MPAM register accesses trap to EL3, and the boot fails.+``arm64.nompam`` exists for that firmware: it makes the kernel treat the+CPUs as not implementing MPAM, so no MPAM system register is accessed.+Set it only on a machine that does not boot without it.++It is not a way to turn MPAM off. Where firmware has cleared TRAPLOWER,+the option leaves the trap controls in MPAM2_EL2 and MPAMHCR_EL2+unwritten, and their reset values are UNKNOWN. KVM still hides MPAM from+guests but no longer enables the traps that stop a guest from using it,+so a guest may be able to read and write MPAM0_EL1 and MPAM1_EL1. KVM
As you are listing registers, MPAMSM_EL1 can go here too.
The trapping respin doesn't reach the nompam path: the override skips
the finalise_el2_state writes whether they clear the traps or set
them, so nothing here needs changing.
Cheers,
/fuad
Thanks,
Ben
quoted
+does not save or restore them, so what one guest writes is still there+when the next guest runs on that CPU, and when the host does. With MPAMEN+set, EL0 and EL1 requests then carry that PARTID and PMG.+ Reporting Bugs ============== If you are not seeing the counters or controls you expect please share the