From: Andrew Jones <drjones@redhat.com>
To: Raghavendra Rao Ananta <rananta@google.com>
Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>, James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
Alexandru Elisei <alexandru.elisei@arm.com>,
Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, Peter Shier <pshier@google.com>,
Ricardo Koller <ricarkol@google.com>,
Oliver Upton <oupton@google.com>,
Reiji Watanabe <reijiw@google.com>,
Jing Zhang <jingzhangos@google.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
kvm@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 09/18] KVM: arm64: selftests: Add guest support to get the vcpuid
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2021 09:25:45 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210913072545.vmmlejgg6jtsz4pm@gator.home> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAJHc60yhg7oYiJpHJK27M7=qo0CMOX+Qj9+q-ZHgTVhWr_76aA@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 11:03:58AM -0700, Raghavendra Rao Ananta wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 1:10 AM Andrew Jones <drjones@redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Sep 09, 2021 at 10:10:56AM -0700, Raghavendra Rao Ananta wrote:
> > > On Thu, Sep 9, 2021 at 12:56 AM Andrew Jones <drjones@redhat.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Sep 09, 2021 at 01:38:09AM +0000, Raghavendra Rao Ananta wrote:
> > ...
> > > > > + for (i = 0; i < KVM_MAX_VCPUS; i++) {
> > > > > + vcpuid = vcpuid_map[i].vcpuid;
> > > > > + GUEST_ASSERT_1(vcpuid != VM_VCPUID_MAP_INVAL, mpidr);
> > > >
> > > > We don't want this assert if it's possible to have sparse maps, which
> > > > it probably isn't ever going to be, but...
> > > >
> > > If you look at the way the array is arranged, the element with
> > > VM_VCPUID_MAP_INVAL acts as a sentinel for us and all the proper
> > > elements would lie before this. So, I don't think we'd have a sparse
> > > array here.
> >
> > If we switch to my suggestion of adding map entries at vcpu-add time and
> > removing them at vcpu-rm time, then the array may become sparse depending
> > on the order of removals.
> >
> Oh, I get it now. But like you mentioned, we add entries to the map
> while the vCPUs are getting added and then sync_global_to_guest()
> later. This seems like a lot of maintainance, unless I'm interpreting
> it wrong or not seeing an advantage.
The advantage is that you don't need to create all vcpus before calling
the map init function. While it's true that we'll still require a call
after adding all vcpus if we want to export the map to the guest, i.e.
sync_global_to_guest, we'll never have to worry about the map being
out of synch wrt vcpus on the host side, and there's no need to call
sync_global_to_guest at all when the test needs the map, but the guest
doesn't need to access it.
> I like your idea of coming up an arch-independent interface, however.
> So I modified it similar to the familiar ucall interface that we have
> and does everything in one shot to avoid any confusion:
Right, ucall_init does call sync_global_to_guest, but it's the only
lib function so far. Everything else exported to the guest must be
done explicitly.
>
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/include/kvm_util.h
> b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/include/kvm_util.h
> index 010b59b13917..0e87cb0c980b 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/include/kvm_util.h
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/include/kvm_util.h
> @@ -400,4 +400,24 @@ uint64_t get_ucall(struct kvm_vm *vm, uint32_t
> vcpu_id, struct ucall *uc);
> int vm_get_stats_fd(struct kvm_vm *vm);
> int vcpu_get_stats_fd(struct kvm_vm *vm, uint32_t vcpuid);
>
> +#define VM_CPUID_MAP_INVAL -1
> +
> +struct vm_cpuid_map {
> + uint64_t hw_cpuid;
> + int vcpuid;
> +};
> +
> +/*
> + * Create a vcpuid:hw_cpuid map and export it to the guest
> + *
> + * Input Args:
> + * vm - KVM VM.
> + *
> + * Output Args: None
> + *
> + * Must be called after all the vCPUs are added to the VM
> + */
> +void vm_cpuid_map_init(struct kvm_vm *vm);
> +int guest_get_vcpuid(void);
> +
> #endif /* SELFTEST_KVM_UTIL_H */
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/lib/aarch64/processor.c
> b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/lib/aarch64/processor.c
> index db64ee206064..e796bb3984a6 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/lib/aarch64/processor.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/lib/aarch64/processor.c
> @@ -16,6 +16,8 @@
>
> static vm_vaddr_t exception_handlers;
>
> +static struct vm_cpuid_map cpuid_map[KVM_MAX_VCPUS];
> +
> static uint64_t page_align(struct kvm_vm *vm, uint64_t v)
> {
> return (v + vm->page_size) & ~(vm->page_size - 1);
> @@ -426,3 +428,42 @@ void vm_install_exception_handler(struct kvm_vm
> *vm, int vector,
> assert(vector < VECTOR_NUM);
> handlers->exception_handlers[vector][0] = handler;
> }
> +
> +void vm_cpuid_map_init(struct kvm_vm *vm)
> +{
> + int i = 0;
> + struct vcpu *vcpu;
> + struct vm_cpuid_map *map;
> +
> + TEST_ASSERT(!list_empty(&vm->vcpus), "vCPUs must have been created\n");
> +
> + list_for_each_entry(vcpu, &vm->vcpus, list) {
> + map = &cpuid_map[i++];
> + map->vcpuid = vcpu->id;
> + get_reg(vm, vcpu->id,
> KVM_ARM64_SYS_REG(SYS_MPIDR_EL1), &map->hw_cpuid);
> + map->hw_cpuid &= MPIDR_HWID_BITMASK;
> + }
> +
> + if (i < KVM_MAX_VCPUS)
> + cpuid_map[i].vcpuid = VM_CPUID_MAP_INVAL;
> +
> + sync_global_to_guest(vm, cpuid_map);
> +}
> +
> +int guest_get_vcpuid(void)
> +{
> + int i, vcpuid;
> + uint64_t mpidr = read_sysreg(mpidr_el1) & MPIDR_HWID_BITMASK;
> +
> + for (i = 0; i < KVM_MAX_VCPUS; i++) {
> + vcpuid = cpuid_map[i].vcpuid;
> +
> + /* Was this vCPU added to the VM after the map was
> initialized? */
> + GUEST_ASSERT_1(vcpuid != VM_CPUID_MAP_INVAL, mpidr);
> +
> + if (mpidr == cpuid_map[i].hw_cpuid)
> + return vcpuid;
> + }
> +
> + /* We should not be reaching here */
> + GUEST_ASSERT_1(0, mpidr);
> + return -1;
> +}
>
> This would ensure that we don't have a sparse array and can use the
> last non-vCPU element as a sentinal node.
> If you still feel preparing the map as and when the vCPUs are created
> makes more sense, I can go for it.
Yup, I think that's still my preference. We don't really need a
sentinel node for such a small array. We can just do
static struct vm_cpuid_map cpuid_map[KVM_MAX_VCPUS] = { [0 ... KVM_MAX_VCPUS - 1] = VM_CPUID_MAP_INVAL };
to ensure all invalid nodes are invalid. After a full loop
if we didn't find a valid entry, then we assert, which easily
supports a sparse array.
Also, please don't forget that guest_get_vcpuid() can be common for all
architectures. We just need an arch-specific call for get_hw_cpuid().
Thanks,
drew
>
> Regards,
> Raghavendra
> > Thanks,
> > drew
> >
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-09-13 7:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 63+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-09-09 1:38 [PATCH v4 00/18] KVM: arm64: selftests: Introduce arch_timer selftest Raghavendra Rao Ananta
2021-09-09 1:38 ` [PATCH v4 01/18] KVM: arm64: selftests: Add MMIO readl/writel support Raghavendra Rao Ananta
2021-09-09 1:38 ` [PATCH v4 02/18] KVM: arm64: selftests: Add sysreg.h Raghavendra Rao Ananta
2021-09-09 2:47 ` Oliver Upton
2021-09-09 6:53 ` Andrew Jones
2021-09-09 16:42 ` Raghavendra Rao Ananta
2021-09-09 17:17 ` Mark Brown
2021-09-09 20:06 ` Raghavendra Rao Ananta
2021-09-10 8:30 ` Mark Brown
2021-09-13 23:38 ` Raghavendra Rao Ananta
2021-09-14 10:39 ` Mark Brown
2021-09-09 1:38 ` [PATCH v4 03/18] KVM: arm64: selftests: Use read/write definitions from sysreg.h Raghavendra Rao Ananta
2021-09-09 2:55 ` Oliver Upton
2021-09-09 6:56 ` Andrew Jones
2021-09-09 16:43 ` Raghavendra Rao Ananta
2021-09-09 1:38 ` [PATCH v4 04/18] KVM: arm64: selftests: Introduce ARM64_SYS_KVM_REG Raghavendra Rao Ananta
2021-09-09 3:02 ` Oliver Upton
2021-09-09 16:48 ` Raghavendra Rao Ananta
2021-09-09 7:04 ` Andrew Jones
2021-09-09 16:49 ` Raghavendra Rao Ananta
2021-09-09 1:38 ` [PATCH v4 05/18] KVM: arm64: selftests: Add support for cpu_relax Raghavendra Rao Ananta
2021-09-09 1:38 ` [PATCH v4 06/18] KVM: arm64: selftests: Add basic support for arch_timers Raghavendra Rao Ananta
2021-09-09 7:07 ` Andrew Jones
2021-09-09 1:38 ` [PATCH v4 07/18] KVM: arm64: selftests: Add basic support to generate delays Raghavendra Rao Ananta
2021-09-09 1:38 ` [PATCH v4 08/18] KVM: arm64: selftests: Add support to disable and enable local IRQs Raghavendra Rao Ananta
2021-09-09 1:38 ` [PATCH v4 09/18] KVM: arm64: selftests: Add guest support to get the vcpuid Raghavendra Rao Ananta
2021-09-09 5:09 ` Oliver Upton
2021-09-09 16:59 ` Raghavendra Rao Ananta
2021-09-09 17:04 ` Oliver Upton
2021-09-09 7:56 ` Andrew Jones
2021-09-09 17:10 ` Raghavendra Rao Ananta
2021-09-10 8:10 ` Andrew Jones
2021-09-10 18:03 ` Raghavendra Rao Ananta
2021-09-13 7:25 ` Andrew Jones [this message]
2021-09-12 7:05 ` Reiji Watanabe
2021-09-13 7:35 ` Andrew Jones
2021-09-13 16:51 ` Raghavendra Rao Ananta
2021-09-09 1:38 ` [PATCH v4 10/18] KVM: arm64: selftests: Add light-weight spinlock support Raghavendra Rao Ananta
2021-09-09 1:38 ` [PATCH v4 11/18] KVM: arm64: selftests: Add basic GICv3 support Raghavendra Rao Ananta
2021-09-09 5:18 ` Oliver Upton
2021-09-09 16:38 ` Raghavendra Rao Ananta
2021-09-09 1:38 ` [PATCH v4 12/18] KVM: selftests: Keep track of the number of vCPUs for a VM Raghavendra Rao Ananta
2021-09-09 5:22 ` Oliver Upton
2021-09-09 13:20 ` Andrew Jones
2021-09-09 1:38 ` [PATCH v4 13/18] KVM: selftests: Add support to get the VM's mode Raghavendra Rao Ananta
2021-09-09 1:38 ` [PATCH v4 14/18] KVM: arm64: selftests: Add host support for vGIC Raghavendra Rao Ananta
2021-09-09 5:32 ` Oliver Upton
2021-09-09 13:34 ` Andrew Jones
2021-09-09 17:25 ` Raghavendra Rao Ananta
2021-09-09 17:20 ` Raghavendra Rao Ananta
2021-09-09 1:38 ` [PATCH v4 15/18] KVM: arm64: selftests: Add arch_timer test Raghavendra Rao Ananta
2021-09-09 5:51 ` Oliver Upton
2021-09-09 18:03 ` Raghavendra Rao Ananta
2021-09-09 1:38 ` [PATCH v4 16/18] KVM: arm64: selftests: arch_timer: Support vCPU migration Raghavendra Rao Ananta
2021-09-09 13:45 ` Andrew Jones
2021-09-09 17:33 ` Raghavendra Rao Ananta
2021-09-09 1:38 ` [PATCH v4 17/18] KVM: arm64: selftests: Replace ARM64_SYS_REG with ARM64_SYS_KVM_REG Raghavendra Rao Ananta
2021-09-09 5:34 ` Oliver Upton
2021-09-09 13:38 ` Andrew Jones
2021-09-09 17:29 ` Raghavendra Rao Ananta
2021-09-09 1:38 ` [PATCH v4 18/18] KVM: selftests: vgic_init: Pull REDIST_REGION_ATTR_ADDR from vgic.h Raghavendra Rao Ananta
2021-09-09 5:36 ` Oliver Upton
2021-09-09 16:41 ` Raghavendra Rao Ananta
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20210913072545.vmmlejgg6jtsz4pm@gator.home \
--to=drjones@redhat.com \
--cc=alexandru.elisei@arm.com \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=james.morse@arm.com \
--cc=jingzhangos@google.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=oupton@google.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=pshier@google.com \
--cc=rananta@google.com \
--cc=reijiw@google.com \
--cc=ricarkol@google.com \
--cc=suzuki.poulose@arm.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).