From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Marc Zyngier Subject: [PATCH v2 9/9] arm: KVM: Treat CP15 accessors returning false as successful Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 17:03:45 +0100 Message-ID: <20170327160345.12402-10-marc.zyngier@arm.com> References: <20170327160345.12402-1-marc.zyngier@arm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Shannon Zhao To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20170327160345.12402-1-marc.zyngier@arm.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: kvmarm-bounces@lists.cs.columbia.edu Sender: kvmarm-bounces@lists.cs.columbia.edu List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org Instead of considering that a CP15 accessor has failed when returning false, let's consider that it is *always* successful (after all, we won't stand for an incomplete emulation). The return value now simply indicates whether we should skip the instruction (because it has now been emulated), or if we should leave the PC alone if the emulation has injected an exception. Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier --- arch/arm/kvm/coproc.c | 6 +++--- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/arch/arm/kvm/coproc.c b/arch/arm/kvm/coproc.c index 519aac12b365..2c14b69511e9 100644 --- a/arch/arm/kvm/coproc.c +++ b/arch/arm/kvm/coproc.c @@ -520,15 +520,15 @@ static int emulate_cp15(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, if (likely(r->access(vcpu, params, r))) { /* Skip instruction, since it was emulated */ kvm_skip_instr(vcpu, kvm_vcpu_trap_il_is32bit(vcpu)); - return 1; } - /* If access function fails, it should complain. */ } else { + /* If access function fails, it should complain. */ kvm_err("Unsupported guest CP15 access at: %08lx\n", *vcpu_pc(vcpu)); print_cp_instr(params); + kvm_inject_undefined(vcpu); } - kvm_inject_undefined(vcpu); + return 1; } -- 2.11.0 From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: marc.zyngier@arm.com (Marc Zyngier) Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 17:03:45 +0100 Subject: [PATCH v2 9/9] arm: KVM: Treat CP15 accessors returning false as successful In-Reply-To: <20170327160345.12402-1-marc.zyngier@arm.com> References: <20170327160345.12402-1-marc.zyngier@arm.com> Message-ID: <20170327160345.12402-10-marc.zyngier@arm.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Instead of considering that a CP15 accessor has failed when returning false, let's consider that it is *always* successful (after all, we won't stand for an incomplete emulation). The return value now simply indicates whether we should skip the instruction (because it has now been emulated), or if we should leave the PC alone if the emulation has injected an exception. Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier --- arch/arm/kvm/coproc.c | 6 +++--- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/arch/arm/kvm/coproc.c b/arch/arm/kvm/coproc.c index 519aac12b365..2c14b69511e9 100644 --- a/arch/arm/kvm/coproc.c +++ b/arch/arm/kvm/coproc.c @@ -520,15 +520,15 @@ static int emulate_cp15(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, if (likely(r->access(vcpu, params, r))) { /* Skip instruction, since it was emulated */ kvm_skip_instr(vcpu, kvm_vcpu_trap_il_is32bit(vcpu)); - return 1; } - /* If access function fails, it should complain. */ } else { + /* If access function fails, it should complain. */ kvm_err("Unsupported guest CP15 access at: %08lx\n", *vcpu_pc(vcpu)); print_cp_instr(params); + kvm_inject_undefined(vcpu); } - kvm_inject_undefined(vcpu); + return 1; } -- 2.11.0