From: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com>
To: Fuad Tabba <tabba@google.com>
Cc: maz@kernel.org, james.morse@arm.com, alexandru.elisei@arm.com,
suzuki.poulose@arm.com, catalin.marinas@arm.com, will@kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
ardb@kernel.org, qwandor@google.com, dbrazdil@google.com,
kernel-team@android.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 15/21] KVM: arm64: Introduce addr_is_memory()
Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2021 11:23:47 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YQkZMyyqgqb8+Uqq@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+EHjTxrdA3wVsBe7zwvvGUGgoWuaGwuWCBL0k2+FcAdTGB=Qw@mail.gmail.com>
On Monday 02 Aug 2021 at 16:52:31 (+0200), Fuad Tabba wrote:
> Hi Quentin.
>
> On Thu, Jul 29, 2021 at 3:28 PM Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com> wrote:
> >
> > Introduce a helper usable in nVHE protected mode to check whether a
> > physical address is in a RAM region or not.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com>
> > ---
> > arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/include/nvhe/mem_protect.h | 1 +
> > arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/nvhe/mem_protect.c | 7 +++++++
> > 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/include/nvhe/mem_protect.h b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/include/nvhe/mem_protect.h
> > index cc86598654b9..5968fbbb3514 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/include/nvhe/mem_protect.h
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/include/nvhe/mem_protect.h
> > @@ -51,6 +51,7 @@ extern const u8 pkvm_hyp_id;
> > int __pkvm_prot_finalize(void);
> > int __pkvm_mark_hyp(phys_addr_t start, phys_addr_t end);
> >
> > +bool addr_is_memory(phys_addr_t phys);
>
> I'm just wondering about the naming of the function. I understand what
> you're trying to achieve with it, but an address without a unit that
> conveys size or type seems to be missing something. Would
Well it does have a type no? I was hopping this would make it clear what
it actually does.
> memregion_addr_is_memory or something like that be a better
> description, since it is what find_mem_range finds?
I think the callers shouldn't need to care about the implementation
details though. This just replies to the question 'is this physical
address in RAM range or not?'. And I could actually imagine that we
would change the implementation some day to avoid the binary search, but
the users probably don't need to care.
Thanks,
Quentin
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com>
To: Fuad Tabba <tabba@google.com>
Cc: kernel-team@android.com, qwandor@google.com, maz@kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, catalin.marinas@arm.com,
will@kernel.org, kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 15/21] KVM: arm64: Introduce addr_is_memory()
Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2021 11:23:47 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YQkZMyyqgqb8+Uqq@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+EHjTxrdA3wVsBe7zwvvGUGgoWuaGwuWCBL0k2+FcAdTGB=Qw@mail.gmail.com>
On Monday 02 Aug 2021 at 16:52:31 (+0200), Fuad Tabba wrote:
> Hi Quentin.
>
> On Thu, Jul 29, 2021 at 3:28 PM Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com> wrote:
> >
> > Introduce a helper usable in nVHE protected mode to check whether a
> > physical address is in a RAM region or not.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com>
> > ---
> > arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/include/nvhe/mem_protect.h | 1 +
> > arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/nvhe/mem_protect.c | 7 +++++++
> > 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/include/nvhe/mem_protect.h b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/include/nvhe/mem_protect.h
> > index cc86598654b9..5968fbbb3514 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/include/nvhe/mem_protect.h
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/include/nvhe/mem_protect.h
> > @@ -51,6 +51,7 @@ extern const u8 pkvm_hyp_id;
> > int __pkvm_prot_finalize(void);
> > int __pkvm_mark_hyp(phys_addr_t start, phys_addr_t end);
> >
> > +bool addr_is_memory(phys_addr_t phys);
>
> I'm just wondering about the naming of the function. I understand what
> you're trying to achieve with it, but an address without a unit that
> conveys size or type seems to be missing something. Would
Well it does have a type no? I was hopping this would make it clear what
it actually does.
> memregion_addr_is_memory or something like that be a better
> description, since it is what find_mem_range finds?
I think the callers shouldn't need to care about the implementation
details though. This just replies to the question 'is this physical
address in RAM range or not?'. And I could actually imagine that we
would change the implementation some day to avoid the binary search, but
the users probably don't need to care.
Thanks,
Quentin
_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com>
To: Fuad Tabba <tabba@google.com>
Cc: maz@kernel.org, james.morse@arm.com, alexandru.elisei@arm.com,
suzuki.poulose@arm.com, catalin.marinas@arm.com, will@kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
ardb@kernel.org, qwandor@google.com, dbrazdil@google.com,
kernel-team@android.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 15/21] KVM: arm64: Introduce addr_is_memory()
Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2021 11:23:47 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YQkZMyyqgqb8+Uqq@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+EHjTxrdA3wVsBe7zwvvGUGgoWuaGwuWCBL0k2+FcAdTGB=Qw@mail.gmail.com>
On Monday 02 Aug 2021 at 16:52:31 (+0200), Fuad Tabba wrote:
> Hi Quentin.
>
> On Thu, Jul 29, 2021 at 3:28 PM Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com> wrote:
> >
> > Introduce a helper usable in nVHE protected mode to check whether a
> > physical address is in a RAM region or not.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com>
> > ---
> > arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/include/nvhe/mem_protect.h | 1 +
> > arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/nvhe/mem_protect.c | 7 +++++++
> > 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/include/nvhe/mem_protect.h b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/include/nvhe/mem_protect.h
> > index cc86598654b9..5968fbbb3514 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/include/nvhe/mem_protect.h
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/include/nvhe/mem_protect.h
> > @@ -51,6 +51,7 @@ extern const u8 pkvm_hyp_id;
> > int __pkvm_prot_finalize(void);
> > int __pkvm_mark_hyp(phys_addr_t start, phys_addr_t end);
> >
> > +bool addr_is_memory(phys_addr_t phys);
>
> I'm just wondering about the naming of the function. I understand what
> you're trying to achieve with it, but an address without a unit that
> conveys size or type seems to be missing something. Would
Well it does have a type no? I was hopping this would make it clear what
it actually does.
> memregion_addr_is_memory or something like that be a better
> description, since it is what find_mem_range finds?
I think the callers shouldn't need to care about the implementation
details though. This just replies to the question 'is this physical
address in RAM range or not?'. And I could actually imagine that we
would change the implementation some day to avoid the binary search, but
the users probably don't need to care.
Thanks,
Quentin
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-08-03 10:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 135+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-07-29 13:27 [PATCH v3 00/21] Track shared pages at EL2 in protected mode Quentin Perret
2021-07-29 13:27 ` Quentin Perret
2021-07-29 13:27 ` Quentin Perret
2021-07-29 13:27 ` [PATCH v3 01/21] KVM: arm64: Add hyp_spin_is_locked() for basic locking assertions at EL2 Quentin Perret
2021-07-29 13:27 ` Quentin Perret
2021-07-29 13:27 ` Quentin Perret
2021-07-29 13:27 ` [PATCH v3 02/21] KVM: arm64: Introduce hyp_assert_lock_held() Quentin Perret
2021-07-29 13:27 ` Quentin Perret
2021-07-29 13:27 ` Quentin Perret
2021-07-29 13:28 ` [PATCH v3 03/21] KVM: arm64: Provide the host_stage2_try() helper macro Quentin Perret
2021-07-29 13:28 ` Quentin Perret
2021-07-29 13:28 ` Quentin Perret
2021-08-02 9:36 ` Fuad Tabba
2021-08-02 9:36 ` Fuad Tabba
2021-08-02 9:36 ` Fuad Tabba
2021-07-29 13:28 ` [PATCH v3 04/21] KVM: arm64: Introduce helper to retrieve a PTE and its level Quentin Perret
2021-07-29 13:28 ` Quentin Perret
2021-07-29 13:28 ` Quentin Perret
2021-07-29 13:28 ` [PATCH v3 05/21] KVM: arm64: Expose page-table helpers Quentin Perret
2021-07-29 13:28 ` Quentin Perret
2021-07-29 13:28 ` Quentin Perret
2021-07-29 13:28 ` [PATCH v3 06/21] KVM: arm64: Optimize host memory aborts Quentin Perret
2021-07-29 13:28 ` Quentin Perret
2021-07-29 13:28 ` Quentin Perret
2021-08-02 9:37 ` Fuad Tabba
2021-08-02 9:37 ` Fuad Tabba
2021-08-02 9:37 ` Fuad Tabba
2021-07-29 13:28 ` [PATCH v3 07/21] KVM: arm64: Rename KVM_PTE_LEAF_ATTR_S2_IGNORED Quentin Perret
2021-07-29 13:28 ` Quentin Perret
2021-07-29 13:28 ` Quentin Perret
2021-08-02 9:37 ` Fuad Tabba
2021-08-02 9:37 ` Fuad Tabba
2021-08-02 9:37 ` Fuad Tabba
2021-07-29 13:28 ` [PATCH v3 08/21] KVM: arm64: Don't overwrite software bits with owner id Quentin Perret
2021-07-29 13:28 ` Quentin Perret
2021-07-29 13:28 ` Quentin Perret
2021-08-02 9:38 ` Fuad Tabba
2021-08-02 9:38 ` Fuad Tabba
2021-08-02 9:38 ` Fuad Tabba
2021-07-29 13:28 ` [PATCH v3 09/21] KVM: arm64: Tolerate re-creating hyp mappings to set software bits Quentin Perret
2021-07-29 13:28 ` Quentin Perret
2021-07-29 13:28 ` Quentin Perret
2021-08-02 9:50 ` Fuad Tabba
2021-08-02 9:50 ` Fuad Tabba
2021-08-02 9:50 ` Fuad Tabba
2021-07-29 13:28 ` [PATCH v3 10/21] KVM: arm64: Enable forcing page-level stage-2 mappings Quentin Perret
2021-07-29 13:28 ` Quentin Perret
2021-07-29 13:28 ` Quentin Perret
2021-08-02 9:49 ` Fuad Tabba
2021-08-02 9:49 ` Fuad Tabba
2021-08-02 9:49 ` Fuad Tabba
2021-08-03 10:13 ` Quentin Perret
2021-08-03 10:13 ` Quentin Perret
2021-08-03 10:13 ` Quentin Perret
2021-08-03 10:43 ` Fuad Tabba
2021-08-03 10:43 ` Fuad Tabba
2021-08-03 10:43 ` Fuad Tabba
2021-07-29 13:28 ` [PATCH v3 11/21] KVM: arm64: Allow populating software bits Quentin Perret
2021-07-29 13:28 ` Quentin Perret
2021-07-29 13:28 ` Quentin Perret
2021-07-29 13:28 ` [PATCH v3 12/21] KVM: arm64: Add helpers to tag shared pages in SW bits Quentin Perret
2021-07-29 13:28 ` Quentin Perret
2021-07-29 13:28 ` Quentin Perret
2021-08-02 10:30 ` Fuad Tabba
2021-08-02 10:30 ` Fuad Tabba
2021-08-02 10:30 ` Fuad Tabba
2021-07-29 13:28 ` [PATCH v3 13/21] KVM: arm64: Expose host stage-2 manipulation helpers Quentin Perret
2021-07-29 13:28 ` Quentin Perret
2021-07-29 13:28 ` Quentin Perret
2021-08-02 11:13 ` Fuad Tabba
2021-08-02 11:13 ` Fuad Tabba
2021-08-02 11:13 ` Fuad Tabba
2021-08-03 10:20 ` Quentin Perret
2021-08-03 10:20 ` Quentin Perret
2021-08-03 10:20 ` Quentin Perret
2021-07-29 13:28 ` [PATCH v3 14/21] KVM: arm64: Expose pkvm_hyp_id Quentin Perret
2021-07-29 13:28 ` Quentin Perret
2021-07-29 13:28 ` Quentin Perret
2021-07-29 13:28 ` [PATCH v3 15/21] KVM: arm64: Introduce addr_is_memory() Quentin Perret
2021-07-29 13:28 ` Quentin Perret
2021-07-29 13:28 ` Quentin Perret
2021-08-02 14:52 ` Fuad Tabba
2021-08-02 14:52 ` Fuad Tabba
2021-08-02 14:52 ` Fuad Tabba
2021-08-03 10:23 ` Quentin Perret [this message]
2021-08-03 10:23 ` Quentin Perret
2021-08-03 10:23 ` Quentin Perret
2021-07-29 13:28 ` [PATCH v3 16/21] KVM: arm64: Enable retrieving protections attributes of PTEs Quentin Perret
2021-07-29 13:28 ` Quentin Perret
2021-07-29 13:28 ` Quentin Perret
2021-08-02 14:52 ` Fuad Tabba
2021-08-02 14:52 ` Fuad Tabba
2021-08-02 14:52 ` Fuad Tabba
2021-08-03 10:24 ` Quentin Perret
2021-08-03 10:24 ` Quentin Perret
2021-08-03 10:24 ` Quentin Perret
2021-07-29 13:28 ` [PATCH v3 17/21] KVM: arm64: Mark host bss and rodata section as shared Quentin Perret
2021-07-29 13:28 ` Quentin Perret
2021-07-29 13:28 ` Quentin Perret
2021-08-03 5:02 ` Fuad Tabba
2021-08-03 5:02 ` Fuad Tabba
2021-08-03 5:02 ` Fuad Tabba
2021-08-03 10:34 ` Quentin Perret
2021-08-03 10:34 ` Quentin Perret
2021-08-03 10:34 ` Quentin Perret
2021-08-03 10:54 ` Fuad Tabba
2021-08-03 10:54 ` Fuad Tabba
2021-08-03 10:54 ` Fuad Tabba
2021-07-29 13:28 ` [PATCH v3 18/21] KVM: arm64: Remove __pkvm_mark_hyp Quentin Perret
2021-07-29 13:28 ` Quentin Perret
2021-07-29 13:28 ` Quentin Perret
2021-07-29 13:28 ` [PATCH v3 19/21] KVM: arm64: Refactor protected nVHE stage-1 locking Quentin Perret
2021-07-29 13:28 ` Quentin Perret
2021-07-29 13:28 ` Quentin Perret
2021-08-03 5:31 ` Fuad Tabba
2021-08-03 5:31 ` Fuad Tabba
2021-08-03 5:31 ` Fuad Tabba
2021-08-03 10:37 ` Quentin Perret
2021-08-03 10:37 ` Quentin Perret
2021-08-03 10:37 ` Quentin Perret
2021-08-03 10:51 ` Fuad Tabba
2021-08-03 10:51 ` Fuad Tabba
2021-08-03 10:51 ` Fuad Tabba
2021-07-29 13:28 ` [PATCH v3 20/21] KVM: arm64: Restrict EL2 stage-1 changes in protected mode Quentin Perret
2021-07-29 13:28 ` Quentin Perret
2021-07-29 13:28 ` Quentin Perret
2021-08-03 8:22 ` Fuad Tabba
2021-08-03 8:22 ` Fuad Tabba
2021-08-03 8:22 ` Fuad Tabba
2021-08-03 10:43 ` Quentin Perret
2021-08-03 10:43 ` Quentin Perret
2021-08-03 10:43 ` Quentin Perret
2021-07-29 13:28 ` [PATCH v3 21/21] KVM: arm64: Make __pkvm_create_mappings static Quentin Perret
2021-07-29 13:28 ` Quentin Perret
2021-07-29 13:28 ` Quentin Perret
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=YQkZMyyqgqb8+Uqq@google.com \
--to=qperret@google.com \
--cc=alexandru.elisei@arm.com \
--cc=ardb@kernel.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=dbrazdil@google.com \
--cc=james.morse@arm.com \
--cc=kernel-team@android.com \
--cc=kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=qwandor@google.com \
--cc=suzuki.poulose@arm.com \
--cc=tabba@google.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 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.