From: Ricardo Koller <ricarkol@google.com> To: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org> Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, pbonzini@redhat.com, drjones@redhat.com, alexandru.elisei@arm.com, eric.auger@redhat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] KVM: selftests: Add exception handling support for aarch64 Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2021 13:48:42 -0700 [thread overview] Message-ID: <YIsbqhQ/OOzluxtq@google.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <87fsz8vp4d.wl-maz@kernel.org> On Thu, Apr 29, 2021 at 08:59:14PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote: > AOn Thu, 29 Apr 2021 18:51:59 +0100, > Ricardo Koller <ricarkol@google.com> wrote: > > > > On Fri, Apr 23, 2021 at 09:58:24AM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote: > > > Hi Ricardo, > > > > > > Thanks for starting this. > > > > > > On Fri, 23 Apr 2021 05:03:49 +0100, > > > Ricardo Koller <ricarkol@google.com> wrote: > > > > +.pushsection ".entry.text", "ax" > > > > +.balign 0x800 > > > > +.global vectors > > > > +vectors: > > > > +.popsection > > > > + > > > > +/* > > > > + * Build an exception handler for vector and append a jump to it into > > > > + * vectors (while making sure that it's 0x80 aligned). > > > > + */ > > > > +.macro HANDLER, el, label, vector > > > > +handler\()\vector: > > > > + save_registers \el > > > > + mov x0, sp > > > > + mov x1, \vector > > > > + bl route_exception > > > > + restore_registers \el > > > > + > > > > +.pushsection ".entry.text", "ax" > > > > +.balign 0x80 > > > > + b handler\()\vector > > > > +.popsection > > > > +.endm > > > > > > That's an interesting construct, wildly different from what we are > > > using elsewhere in the kernel, but hey, I like change ;-). It'd be > > > good to add a comment to spell out that anything that emits into > > > .entry.text between the declaration of 'vectors' and the end of this > > > file will break everything. > > > > > > > + > > > > +.global ex_handler_code > > > > +ex_handler_code: > > > > + HANDLER 1, sync, 0 // Synchronous EL1t > > > > + HANDLER 1, irq, 1 // IRQ EL1t > > > > + HANDLER 1, fiq, 2 // FIQ EL1t > > > > + HANDLER 1, error, 3 // Error EL1t > > > > > > Can any of these actually happen? As far as I can see, the whole > > > selftest environment seems to be designed around EL1h. > > > > > > > They can happen. KVM defaults to use EL1h: > > That's not a KVM decision. That's an architectural requirement. Reset > is an exception, exception use the handler mode. > That makes sense, thanks for the clarification. > > > > #define VCPU_RESET_PSTATE_EL1 (PSR_MODE_EL1h | PSR_A_BIT | PSR_I_BIT | \ > > > > but then a guest can set the SPSel to 0: > > > > asm volatile("msr spsel, #0"); > > > > and this happens: > > > > Unexpected exception guest (vector:0x0, ec:0x25) > > > > I think it should still be a valid situation: some test might want to > > try it. > > Sure, but that's not what this test (in patch #2) is doing, is it? > If, as I believe, this is an unexpected situation, why not handle it > separately? I'm not advocating one way or another, but it'd be good to > understand the actual scope of the exception handling in this > infrastructure. > > If you plan to allow tests to run in the EL1t environment, where do > you decide to switch back to EL1t after taking the exception in EL1h? > Are the tests supposed to implement both stack layouts? > > Overall, I'm worried that nobody is going to use this layout *unless* > it becomes mandated. > > Thanks, > > M. > > -- > Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible. Got it, I see your point. Yes, I'm definitely not planning to use it. Will just treat those vectors as "invalid". Thanks again, Ricardo
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Ricardo Koller <ricarkol@google.com> To: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org> Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, pbonzini@redhat.com, kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] KVM: selftests: Add exception handling support for aarch64 Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2021 13:48:42 -0700 [thread overview] Message-ID: <YIsbqhQ/OOzluxtq@google.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <87fsz8vp4d.wl-maz@kernel.org> On Thu, Apr 29, 2021 at 08:59:14PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote: > AOn Thu, 29 Apr 2021 18:51:59 +0100, > Ricardo Koller <ricarkol@google.com> wrote: > > > > On Fri, Apr 23, 2021 at 09:58:24AM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote: > > > Hi Ricardo, > > > > > > Thanks for starting this. > > > > > > On Fri, 23 Apr 2021 05:03:49 +0100, > > > Ricardo Koller <ricarkol@google.com> wrote: > > > > +.pushsection ".entry.text", "ax" > > > > +.balign 0x800 > > > > +.global vectors > > > > +vectors: > > > > +.popsection > > > > + > > > > +/* > > > > + * Build an exception handler for vector and append a jump to it into > > > > + * vectors (while making sure that it's 0x80 aligned). > > > > + */ > > > > +.macro HANDLER, el, label, vector > > > > +handler\()\vector: > > > > + save_registers \el > > > > + mov x0, sp > > > > + mov x1, \vector > > > > + bl route_exception > > > > + restore_registers \el > > > > + > > > > +.pushsection ".entry.text", "ax" > > > > +.balign 0x80 > > > > + b handler\()\vector > > > > +.popsection > > > > +.endm > > > > > > That's an interesting construct, wildly different from what we are > > > using elsewhere in the kernel, but hey, I like change ;-). It'd be > > > good to add a comment to spell out that anything that emits into > > > .entry.text between the declaration of 'vectors' and the end of this > > > file will break everything. > > > > > > > + > > > > +.global ex_handler_code > > > > +ex_handler_code: > > > > + HANDLER 1, sync, 0 // Synchronous EL1t > > > > + HANDLER 1, irq, 1 // IRQ EL1t > > > > + HANDLER 1, fiq, 2 // FIQ EL1t > > > > + HANDLER 1, error, 3 // Error EL1t > > > > > > Can any of these actually happen? As far as I can see, the whole > > > selftest environment seems to be designed around EL1h. > > > > > > > They can happen. KVM defaults to use EL1h: > > That's not a KVM decision. That's an architectural requirement. Reset > is an exception, exception use the handler mode. > That makes sense, thanks for the clarification. > > > > #define VCPU_RESET_PSTATE_EL1 (PSR_MODE_EL1h | PSR_A_BIT | PSR_I_BIT | \ > > > > but then a guest can set the SPSel to 0: > > > > asm volatile("msr spsel, #0"); > > > > and this happens: > > > > Unexpected exception guest (vector:0x0, ec:0x25) > > > > I think it should still be a valid situation: some test might want to > > try it. > > Sure, but that's not what this test (in patch #2) is doing, is it? > If, as I believe, this is an unexpected situation, why not handle it > separately? I'm not advocating one way or another, but it'd be good to > understand the actual scope of the exception handling in this > infrastructure. > > If you plan to allow tests to run in the EL1t environment, where do > you decide to switch back to EL1t after taking the exception in EL1h? > Are the tests supposed to implement both stack layouts? > > Overall, I'm worried that nobody is going to use this layout *unless* > it becomes mandated. > > Thanks, > > M. > > -- > Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible. Got it, I see your point. Yes, I'm definitely not planning to use it. Will just treat those vectors as "invalid". Thanks again, Ricardo _______________________________________________ kvmarm mailing list kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-04-29 20:48 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2021-04-23 4:03 [PATCH 0/3] KVM: selftests: arm64 exception handling and debug test Ricardo Koller 2021-04-23 4:03 ` Ricardo Koller 2021-04-23 4:03 ` [PATCH 1/3] KVM: selftests: Add exception handling support for aarch64 Ricardo Koller 2021-04-23 4:03 ` Ricardo Koller 2021-04-23 8:58 ` Marc Zyngier 2021-04-23 8:58 ` Marc Zyngier 2021-04-23 11:05 ` Andrew Jones 2021-04-23 11:05 ` Andrew Jones 2021-04-26 18:58 ` Ricardo Koller 2021-04-26 18:58 ` Ricardo Koller 2021-04-29 17:51 ` Ricardo Koller 2021-04-29 17:51 ` Ricardo Koller 2021-04-29 19:59 ` Marc Zyngier 2021-04-29 19:59 ` Marc Zyngier 2021-04-29 20:48 ` Ricardo Koller [this message] 2021-04-29 20:48 ` Ricardo Koller 2021-04-23 4:03 ` [PATCH 2/3] KVM: selftests: Add aarch64/debug-exceptions test Ricardo Koller 2021-04-23 4:03 ` Ricardo Koller 2021-04-23 11:22 ` Andrew Jones 2021-04-23 11:22 ` Andrew Jones 2021-04-23 4:03 ` [PATCH 3/3] KVM: selftests: Use a ucall for x86 unhandled vector reporting Ricardo Koller 2021-04-23 4:03 ` Ricardo Koller 2021-04-23 10:45 ` Andrew Jones 2021-04-23 10:45 ` Andrew Jones
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=YIsbqhQ/OOzluxtq@google.com \ --to=ricarkol@google.com \ --cc=alexandru.elisei@arm.com \ --cc=drjones@redhat.com \ --cc=eric.auger@redhat.com \ --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu \ --cc=maz@kernel.org \ --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \ /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: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.