From: Christoffer Dall <cdall@linaro.org> To: Yury Norov <ynorov@caviumnetworks.com> Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>, Shih-Wei Li <shihwei@cs.columbia.edu>, kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 35/37] KVM: arm/arm64: Get rid of vgic_elrsr Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2017 20:53:40 +0100 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20171126195340.GQ28855@cbox> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20171126143902.vwunp2uucw42xvwo@yury-thinkpad> On Sun, Nov 26, 2017 at 05:39:02PM +0300, Yury Norov wrote: > On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 12:41:39PM +0200, Christoffer Dall wrote: > > There is really no need to store the vgic_elrsr on the VGIC data > > structures as the only need we have for the elrsr is to figure out if an > > LR is inavtive when we save the VGIC state upon returning from the > > guest. We can might as well store this in a temporary local variable. > > > > This also gets rid of the endianness conversion in the VGIC save > > function, which is completely unnecessary and would actually result in > > incorrect functionality on big-endian systems, > > Does it mean that existing code in mainline is broken for BE systems? > If so, I think that it should be fixed in separated patch... > I think it's broken yes. But I was looking for someone to actually tell me wether they agreed on this or not. Despite the rare use of big endian hosts, it may be ware to submit this is a separate fix indeed. > > because we are only using > > typed values here and not converting pointers and reading different > > types here. > > > > Signed-off-by: Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@linaro.org> > > --- > > include/kvm/arm_vgic.h | 2 -- > > virt/kvm/arm/hyp/vgic-v3-sr.c | 6 +++--- > > virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-v2.c | 33 +++++++-------------------------- > > virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-v3.c | 1 - > > 4 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 32 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/include/kvm/arm_vgic.h b/include/kvm/arm_vgic.h > > index 34dba51..79c9e67 100644 > > --- a/include/kvm/arm_vgic.h > > +++ b/include/kvm/arm_vgic.h > > @@ -237,7 +237,6 @@ struct vgic_dist { > > struct vgic_v2_cpu_if { > > u32 vgic_hcr; > > u32 vgic_vmcr; > > - u64 vgic_elrsr; /* Saved only */ > > u32 vgic_apr; > > u32 vgic_lr[VGIC_V2_MAX_LRS]; > > }; > > @@ -246,7 +245,6 @@ struct vgic_v3_cpu_if { > > u32 vgic_hcr; > > u32 vgic_vmcr; > > u32 vgic_sre; /* Restored only, change ignored */ > > - u32 vgic_elrsr; /* Saved only */ > > u32 vgic_ap0r[4]; > > u32 vgic_ap1r[4]; > > u64 vgic_lr[VGIC_V3_MAX_LRS]; > > diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/hyp/vgic-v3-sr.c b/virt/kvm/arm/hyp/vgic-v3-sr.c > > index 91728fa..05548b2 100644 > > --- a/virt/kvm/arm/hyp/vgic-v3-sr.c > > +++ b/virt/kvm/arm/hyp/vgic-v3-sr.c > > @@ -222,15 +222,16 @@ void __hyp_text __vgic_v3_save_state(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > > if (used_lrs) { > > int i; > > u32 nr_pre_bits; > > + u32 elrsr; > > > > - cpu_if->vgic_elrsr = read_gicreg(ICH_ELSR_EL2); > > + elrsr = read_gicreg(ICH_ELSR_EL2); > > > > write_gicreg(0, ICH_HCR_EL2); > > val = read_gicreg(ICH_VTR_EL2); > > nr_pre_bits = vtr_to_nr_pre_bits(val); > > > > for (i = 0; i < used_lrs; i++) { > > - if (cpu_if->vgic_elrsr & (1 << i)) > > + if (elrsr & (1 << i)) > > Same comments as to patch 28. Here should be test_bit(), I think. > And if it's possible, for set bits in elrsr it's simpler not to write > ~ICH_LR_STATE to cpu_if->vgic_lr, but directly to IO memory in > __vgic_v3_restore_state(). > I think you're missing how the VGIC works. We need to clear the LR_STATE on the memory representation of the LRs, because that's how we know the guest has processed an interrupt and is ready to take a new one. Also, there's no IO memory for the GICv3 LRs, they're system registers. > > cpu_if->vgic_lr[i] &= ~ICH_LR_STATE; > > else > > cpu_if->vgic_lr[i] = __gic_v3_get_lr(i); > > @@ -261,7 +262,6 @@ void __hyp_text __vgic_v3_save_state(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > > if (static_branch_unlikely(&vgic_v3_cpuif_trap)) > > write_gicreg(0, ICH_HCR_EL2); > > > > - cpu_if->vgic_elrsr = 0xffff; > > cpu_if->vgic_ap0r[0] = 0; > > cpu_if->vgic_ap0r[1] = 0; > > cpu_if->vgic_ap0r[2] = 0; > > diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-v2.c b/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-v2.c > > index 259079b..df7e03b 100644 > > --- a/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-v2.c > > +++ b/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-v2.c > > @@ -247,7 +247,6 @@ void vgic_v2_enable(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > > * anyway. > > */ > > vcpu->arch.vgic_cpu.vgic_v2.vgic_vmcr = 0; > > - vcpu->arch.vgic_cpu.vgic_v2.vgic_elrsr = ~0; > > > > /* Get the show on the road... */ > > vcpu->arch.vgic_cpu.vgic_v2.vgic_hcr = GICH_HCR_EN; > > @@ -404,33 +403,19 @@ int vgic_v2_probe(const struct gic_kvm_info *info) > > return ret; > > } > > > > -static void save_elrsr(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, void __iomem *base) > > -{ > > - struct vgic_v2_cpu_if *cpu_if = &vcpu->arch.vgic_cpu.vgic_v2; > > - int nr_lr = kvm_vgic_global_state.nr_lr; > > - u32 elrsr0, elrsr1; > > - > > - elrsr0 = readl_relaxed(base + GICH_ELRSR0); > > - if (unlikely(nr_lr > 32)) > > - elrsr1 = readl_relaxed(base + GICH_ELRSR1); > > - else > > - elrsr1 = 0; > > - > > -#ifdef CONFIG_CPU_BIG_ENDIAN > > - cpu_if->vgic_elrsr = ((u64)elrsr0 << 32) | elrsr1; > > -#else > > - cpu_if->vgic_elrsr = ((u64)elrsr1 << 32) | elrsr0; > > -#endif > > -} > > - > > static void save_lrs(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, void __iomem *base) > > { > > struct vgic_v2_cpu_if *cpu_if = &vcpu->arch.vgic_cpu.vgic_v2; > > - int i; > > u64 used_lrs = vcpu->arch.vgic_cpu.used_lrs; > > Not to this patch, but anyway, what for to reserve u64 for used_lrs > here and in struct vgic_cpu, when maximum value for it is 64? > What's your concern? A couple of extra bytes in the vcpu structure? I wouldn't be opposed to changing the data type and moving things around if someone wants to micro-optimize the KVM memory footprint. Patches are welxome. > > + u64 elrsr; > > + int i; > > Nit. What for you move 'int i' declaration? > It looks nicer that with the long two lines. > > + > > + elrsr = readl_relaxed(base + GICH_ELRSR0); > > + if (unlikely(used_lrs > 32)) > > + elrsr |= ((u64)readl_relaxed(base + GICH_ELRSR1)) << 32; > > > > for (i = 0; i < used_lrs; i++) { > > - if (cpu_if->vgic_elrsr & (1UL << i)) > > + if (elrsr & (1UL << i)) > > test_bit() > Given that test_bit is more complicated because it can work on arbitrary length bitmaps and we're operating on a single word here, what is the benefit? Is it just that you prefer reading test_bit for readability or do you have a claim of performance benefits? -Christoffer > > cpu_if->vgic_lr[i] &= ~GICH_LR_STATE; > > else > > cpu_if->vgic_lr[i] = readl_relaxed(base + GICH_LR0 + (i * 4)); > > @@ -452,13 +437,9 @@ void vgic_v2_save_state(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > > > > if (used_lrs) { > > cpu_if->vgic_apr = readl_relaxed(base + GICH_APR); > > - > > - save_elrsr(vcpu, base); > > save_lrs(vcpu, base); > > - > > writel_relaxed(0, base + GICH_HCR); > > } else { > > - cpu_if->vgic_elrsr = ~0UL; > > cpu_if->vgic_apr = 0; > > } > > } > > diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-v3.c b/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-v3.c > > index 863351c..0900649 100644 > > --- a/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-v3.c > > +++ b/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-v3.c > > @@ -237,7 +237,6 @@ void vgic_v3_enable(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > > * anyway. > > */ > > vgic_v3->vgic_vmcr = 0; > > - vgic_v3->vgic_elrsr = ~0; > > > > /* > > * If we are emulating a GICv3, we do it in an non-GICv2-compatible > > -- > > 2.9.0
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: cdall@linaro.org (Christoffer Dall) To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Subject: [PATCH 35/37] KVM: arm/arm64: Get rid of vgic_elrsr Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2017 20:53:40 +0100 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20171126195340.GQ28855@cbox> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20171126143902.vwunp2uucw42xvwo@yury-thinkpad> On Sun, Nov 26, 2017 at 05:39:02PM +0300, Yury Norov wrote: > On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 12:41:39PM +0200, Christoffer Dall wrote: > > There is really no need to store the vgic_elrsr on the VGIC data > > structures as the only need we have for the elrsr is to figure out if an > > LR is inavtive when we save the VGIC state upon returning from the > > guest. We can might as well store this in a temporary local variable. > > > > This also gets rid of the endianness conversion in the VGIC save > > function, which is completely unnecessary and would actually result in > > incorrect functionality on big-endian systems, > > Does it mean that existing code in mainline is broken for BE systems? > If so, I think that it should be fixed in separated patch... > I think it's broken yes. But I was looking for someone to actually tell me wether they agreed on this or not. Despite the rare use of big endian hosts, it may be ware to submit this is a separate fix indeed. > > because we are only using > > typed values here and not converting pointers and reading different > > types here. > > > > Signed-off-by: Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@linaro.org> > > --- > > include/kvm/arm_vgic.h | 2 -- > > virt/kvm/arm/hyp/vgic-v3-sr.c | 6 +++--- > > virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-v2.c | 33 +++++++-------------------------- > > virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-v3.c | 1 - > > 4 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 32 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/include/kvm/arm_vgic.h b/include/kvm/arm_vgic.h > > index 34dba51..79c9e67 100644 > > --- a/include/kvm/arm_vgic.h > > +++ b/include/kvm/arm_vgic.h > > @@ -237,7 +237,6 @@ struct vgic_dist { > > struct vgic_v2_cpu_if { > > u32 vgic_hcr; > > u32 vgic_vmcr; > > - u64 vgic_elrsr; /* Saved only */ > > u32 vgic_apr; > > u32 vgic_lr[VGIC_V2_MAX_LRS]; > > }; > > @@ -246,7 +245,6 @@ struct vgic_v3_cpu_if { > > u32 vgic_hcr; > > u32 vgic_vmcr; > > u32 vgic_sre; /* Restored only, change ignored */ > > - u32 vgic_elrsr; /* Saved only */ > > u32 vgic_ap0r[4]; > > u32 vgic_ap1r[4]; > > u64 vgic_lr[VGIC_V3_MAX_LRS]; > > diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/hyp/vgic-v3-sr.c b/virt/kvm/arm/hyp/vgic-v3-sr.c > > index 91728fa..05548b2 100644 > > --- a/virt/kvm/arm/hyp/vgic-v3-sr.c > > +++ b/virt/kvm/arm/hyp/vgic-v3-sr.c > > @@ -222,15 +222,16 @@ void __hyp_text __vgic_v3_save_state(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > > if (used_lrs) { > > int i; > > u32 nr_pre_bits; > > + u32 elrsr; > > > > - cpu_if->vgic_elrsr = read_gicreg(ICH_ELSR_EL2); > > + elrsr = read_gicreg(ICH_ELSR_EL2); > > > > write_gicreg(0, ICH_HCR_EL2); > > val = read_gicreg(ICH_VTR_EL2); > > nr_pre_bits = vtr_to_nr_pre_bits(val); > > > > for (i = 0; i < used_lrs; i++) { > > - if (cpu_if->vgic_elrsr & (1 << i)) > > + if (elrsr & (1 << i)) > > Same comments as to patch 28. Here should be test_bit(), I think. > And if it's possible, for set bits in elrsr it's simpler not to write > ~ICH_LR_STATE to cpu_if->vgic_lr, but directly to IO memory in > __vgic_v3_restore_state(). > I think you're missing how the VGIC works. We need to clear the LR_STATE on the memory representation of the LRs, because that's how we know the guest has processed an interrupt and is ready to take a new one. Also, there's no IO memory for the GICv3 LRs, they're system registers. > > cpu_if->vgic_lr[i] &= ~ICH_LR_STATE; > > else > > cpu_if->vgic_lr[i] = __gic_v3_get_lr(i); > > @@ -261,7 +262,6 @@ void __hyp_text __vgic_v3_save_state(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > > if (static_branch_unlikely(&vgic_v3_cpuif_trap)) > > write_gicreg(0, ICH_HCR_EL2); > > > > - cpu_if->vgic_elrsr = 0xffff; > > cpu_if->vgic_ap0r[0] = 0; > > cpu_if->vgic_ap0r[1] = 0; > > cpu_if->vgic_ap0r[2] = 0; > > diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-v2.c b/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-v2.c > > index 259079b..df7e03b 100644 > > --- a/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-v2.c > > +++ b/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-v2.c > > @@ -247,7 +247,6 @@ void vgic_v2_enable(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > > * anyway. > > */ > > vcpu->arch.vgic_cpu.vgic_v2.vgic_vmcr = 0; > > - vcpu->arch.vgic_cpu.vgic_v2.vgic_elrsr = ~0; > > > > /* Get the show on the road... */ > > vcpu->arch.vgic_cpu.vgic_v2.vgic_hcr = GICH_HCR_EN; > > @@ -404,33 +403,19 @@ int vgic_v2_probe(const struct gic_kvm_info *info) > > return ret; > > } > > > > -static void save_elrsr(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, void __iomem *base) > > -{ > > - struct vgic_v2_cpu_if *cpu_if = &vcpu->arch.vgic_cpu.vgic_v2; > > - int nr_lr = kvm_vgic_global_state.nr_lr; > > - u32 elrsr0, elrsr1; > > - > > - elrsr0 = readl_relaxed(base + GICH_ELRSR0); > > - if (unlikely(nr_lr > 32)) > > - elrsr1 = readl_relaxed(base + GICH_ELRSR1); > > - else > > - elrsr1 = 0; > > - > > -#ifdef CONFIG_CPU_BIG_ENDIAN > > - cpu_if->vgic_elrsr = ((u64)elrsr0 << 32) | elrsr1; > > -#else > > - cpu_if->vgic_elrsr = ((u64)elrsr1 << 32) | elrsr0; > > -#endif > > -} > > - > > static void save_lrs(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, void __iomem *base) > > { > > struct vgic_v2_cpu_if *cpu_if = &vcpu->arch.vgic_cpu.vgic_v2; > > - int i; > > u64 used_lrs = vcpu->arch.vgic_cpu.used_lrs; > > Not to this patch, but anyway, what for to reserve u64 for used_lrs > here and in struct vgic_cpu, when maximum value for it is 64? > What's your concern? A couple of extra bytes in the vcpu structure? I wouldn't be opposed to changing the data type and moving things around if someone wants to micro-optimize the KVM memory footprint. Patches are welxome. > > + u64 elrsr; > > + int i; > > Nit. What for you move 'int i' declaration? > It looks nicer that with the long two lines. > > + > > + elrsr = readl_relaxed(base + GICH_ELRSR0); > > + if (unlikely(used_lrs > 32)) > > + elrsr |= ((u64)readl_relaxed(base + GICH_ELRSR1)) << 32; > > > > for (i = 0; i < used_lrs; i++) { > > - if (cpu_if->vgic_elrsr & (1UL << i)) > > + if (elrsr & (1UL << i)) > > test_bit() > Given that test_bit is more complicated because it can work on arbitrary length bitmaps and we're operating on a single word here, what is the benefit? Is it just that you prefer reading test_bit for readability or do you have a claim of performance benefits? -Christoffer > > cpu_if->vgic_lr[i] &= ~GICH_LR_STATE; > > else > > cpu_if->vgic_lr[i] = readl_relaxed(base + GICH_LR0 + (i * 4)); > > @@ -452,13 +437,9 @@ void vgic_v2_save_state(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > > > > if (used_lrs) { > > cpu_if->vgic_apr = readl_relaxed(base + GICH_APR); > > - > > - save_elrsr(vcpu, base); > > save_lrs(vcpu, base); > > - > > writel_relaxed(0, base + GICH_HCR); > > } else { > > - cpu_if->vgic_elrsr = ~0UL; > > cpu_if->vgic_apr = 0; > > } > > } > > diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-v3.c b/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-v3.c > > index 863351c..0900649 100644 > > --- a/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-v3.c > > +++ b/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-v3.c > > @@ -237,7 +237,6 @@ void vgic_v3_enable(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > > * anyway. > > */ > > vgic_v3->vgic_vmcr = 0; > > - vgic_v3->vgic_elrsr = ~0; > > > > /* > > * If we are emulating a GICv3, we do it in an non-GICv2-compatible > > -- > > 2.9.0
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-11-26 19:53 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 254+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2017-10-12 10:41 [PATCH 00/37] Optimize KVM/ARM for VHE systems Christoffer Dall 2017-10-12 10:41 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-10-12 10:41 ` [PATCH 01/37] KVM: arm64: Avoid storing the vcpu pointer on the stack Christoffer Dall 2017-10-12 10:41 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-10-12 15:49 ` Marc Zyngier 2017-10-12 15:49 ` Marc Zyngier 2017-10-12 17:02 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-10-12 17:02 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-10-13 11:31 ` Marc Zyngier 2017-10-13 11:31 ` Marc Zyngier 2017-11-23 20:59 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-11-23 20:59 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-11-27 11:11 ` James Morse 2017-11-27 11:11 ` James Morse 2017-11-29 18:20 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-11-29 18:20 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-11-06 17:22 ` Andrew Jones 2017-11-06 17:22 ` Andrew Jones 2017-11-07 8:24 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-11-07 8:24 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-10-12 10:41 ` [PATCH 02/37] KVM: arm64: Rework hyp_panic for VHE and non-VHE Christoffer Dall 2017-10-12 10:41 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-10-12 15:55 ` Marc Zyngier 2017-10-12 15:55 ` Marc Zyngier 2017-10-12 17:06 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-10-12 17:06 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-10-12 10:41 ` [PATCH 03/37] KVM: arm64: Move HCR_INT_OVERRIDE to default HCR_EL2 guest flag Christoffer Dall 2017-10-12 10:41 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-10-12 16:20 ` Marc Zyngier 2017-10-12 16:20 ` Marc Zyngier 2017-10-12 10:41 ` [PATCH 04/37] KVM: arm/arm64: Get rid of vcpu->arch.irq_lines Christoffer Dall 2017-10-12 10:41 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-10-12 16:24 ` Marc Zyngier 2017-10-12 16:24 ` Marc Zyngier 2017-11-06 17:58 ` Andrew Jones 2017-11-06 17:58 ` Andrew Jones 2017-11-14 12:17 ` Julien Thierry 2017-11-14 12:17 ` Julien Thierry 2017-11-16 16:11 ` Julien Thierry 2017-11-16 16:11 ` Julien Thierry 2017-11-26 16:04 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-11-26 16:04 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-10-12 10:41 ` [PATCH 05/37] KVM: Record the executing ioctl number on the vcpu struct Christoffer Dall 2017-10-12 10:41 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-10-13 17:13 ` Radim Krčmář 2017-10-13 17:13 ` Radim Krčmář 2017-10-13 17:31 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-10-13 17:31 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-10-13 18:38 ` Radim Krčmář 2017-10-13 18:38 ` Radim Krčmář 2017-10-13 18:51 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-10-13 18:51 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-11-07 10:45 ` Andrew Jones 2017-11-07 10:45 ` Andrew Jones 2017-11-22 20:28 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-11-22 20:28 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-10-12 10:41 ` [PATCH 06/37] KVM: arm/arm64: Only load/put VCPU state for KVM_RUN Christoffer Dall 2017-10-12 10:41 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-10-12 10:41 ` [PATCH 07/37] KVM: arm/arm64: Add kvm_vcpu_load_sysregs and kvm_vcpu_put_sysregs Christoffer Dall 2017-10-12 10:41 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-11-07 10:56 ` Andrew Jones 2017-11-07 10:56 ` Andrew Jones 2017-11-07 11:10 ` Andrew Jones 2017-11-07 11:10 ` Andrew Jones 2017-11-22 20:34 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-11-22 20:34 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-11-23 11:08 ` Andrew Jones 2017-11-23 11:08 ` Andrew Jones 2017-10-12 10:41 ` [PATCH 08/37] KVM: arm64: Defer restoring host VFP state to vcpu_put Christoffer Dall 2017-10-12 10:41 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-11-07 13:15 ` Andrew Jones 2017-11-07 13:15 ` Andrew Jones 2017-11-26 16:24 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-11-26 16:24 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-11-15 16:04 ` Andrew Jones 2017-11-15 16:04 ` Andrew Jones 2017-11-26 16:17 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-11-26 16:17 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-11-27 8:32 ` Andrew Jones 2017-11-27 8:32 ` Andrew Jones 2017-11-25 7:52 ` Yury Norov 2017-11-25 7:52 ` Yury Norov 2017-11-26 16:17 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-11-26 16:17 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-11-26 18:58 ` Yury Norov 2017-11-26 18:58 ` Yury Norov 2017-11-26 19:18 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-11-26 19:18 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-11-27 6:25 ` Yury Norov 2017-11-27 6:25 ` Yury Norov 2017-11-30 19:07 ` Marc Zyngier 2017-11-30 19:07 ` Marc Zyngier 2017-10-12 10:41 ` [PATCH 09/37] KVM: arm64: Move debug dirty flag calculation out of world switch Christoffer Dall 2017-10-12 10:41 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-11-07 14:09 ` Andrew Jones 2017-11-07 14:09 ` Andrew Jones 2017-11-25 8:09 ` Yury Norov 2017-11-25 8:09 ` Yury Norov 2017-12-01 17:25 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-12-01 17:25 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-12-03 13:17 ` Andrew Jones 2017-12-03 13:17 ` Andrew Jones 2017-10-12 10:41 ` [PATCH 10/37] KVM: arm64: Slightly improve debug save/restore functions Christoffer Dall 2017-10-12 10:41 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-11-07 14:22 ` Andrew Jones 2017-11-07 14:22 ` Andrew Jones 2017-12-01 17:51 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-12-01 17:51 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-11-14 16:42 ` Julien Thierry 2017-11-14 16:42 ` Julien Thierry 2017-12-01 15:19 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-12-01 15:19 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-12-06 15:38 ` Julien Thierry 2017-12-06 15:38 ` Julien Thierry 2017-10-12 10:41 ` [PATCH 11/37] KVM: arm64: Improve debug register save/restore flow Christoffer Dall 2017-10-12 10:41 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-11-07 14:48 ` Andrew Jones 2017-11-07 14:48 ` Andrew Jones 2017-12-01 17:52 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-12-01 17:52 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-12-03 13:49 ` Andrew Jones 2017-12-03 13:49 ` Andrew Jones 2017-12-03 20:47 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-12-03 20:47 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-10-12 10:41 ` [PATCH 12/37] KVM: arm64: Factor out fault info population and gic workarounds Christoffer Dall 2017-10-12 10:41 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-11-07 15:12 ` Andrew Jones 2017-11-07 15:12 ` Andrew Jones 2017-10-12 10:41 ` [PATCH 13/37] KVM: arm64: Introduce VHE-specific kvm_vcpu_run Christoffer Dall 2017-10-12 10:41 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-11-07 15:25 ` Andrew Jones 2017-11-07 15:25 ` Andrew Jones 2017-12-01 18:10 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-12-01 18:10 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-10-12 10:41 ` [PATCH 14/37] KVM: arm64: Remove kern_hyp_va() use in VHE switch function Christoffer Dall 2017-10-12 10:41 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-11-07 16:07 ` Andrew Jones 2017-11-07 16:07 ` Andrew Jones 2017-10-12 10:41 ` [PATCH 15/37] KVM: arm64: Don't deactivate VM on VHE systems Christoffer Dall 2017-10-12 10:41 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-11-07 16:14 ` Andrew Jones 2017-11-07 16:14 ` Andrew Jones 2017-12-03 19:27 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-12-03 19:27 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-10-12 10:41 ` [PATCH 16/37] KVM: arm64: Remove noop calls to timer save/restore from VHE switch Christoffer Dall 2017-10-12 10:41 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-11-07 16:25 ` Andrew Jones 2017-11-07 16:25 ` Andrew Jones 2017-12-03 19:27 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-12-03 19:27 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-10-12 10:41 ` [PATCH 17/37] KVM: arm64: Move userspace system registers into separate function Christoffer Dall 2017-10-12 10:41 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-11-08 9:32 ` Andrew Jones 2017-11-08 9:32 ` Andrew Jones 2017-12-03 19:36 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-12-03 19:36 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-10-12 10:41 ` [PATCH 18/37] KVM: arm64: Rewrite sysreg alternatives to static keys Christoffer Dall 2017-10-12 10:41 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-10-12 10:41 ` [PATCH 19/37] KVM: arm64: Introduce separate VHE/non-VHE sysreg save/restore functions Christoffer Dall 2017-10-12 10:41 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-11-08 10:31 ` Andrew Jones 2017-11-08 10:31 ` Andrew Jones 2017-10-12 10:41 ` [PATCH 20/37] KVM: arm64: Unify non-VHE host/guest sysreg save and restore functions Christoffer Dall 2017-10-12 10:41 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-11-08 10:39 ` Andrew Jones 2017-11-08 10:39 ` Andrew Jones 2017-12-03 19:41 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-12-03 19:41 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-10-12 10:41 ` [PATCH 21/37] KVM: arm64: Don't save the host ELR_EL2 and SPSR_EL2 on VHE systems Christoffer Dall 2017-10-12 10:41 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-11-08 17:03 ` Andrew Jones 2017-11-08 17:03 ` Andrew Jones 2017-12-03 19:45 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-12-03 19:45 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-10-12 10:41 ` [PATCH 22/37] KVM: arm64: Change 32-bit handling of VM system registers Christoffer Dall 2017-10-12 10:41 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-11-13 16:25 ` Andrew Jones 2017-11-13 16:25 ` Andrew Jones 2017-10-12 10:41 ` [PATCH 23/37] KVM: arm64: Prepare to handle traps on deferred VM sysregs Christoffer Dall 2017-10-12 10:41 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-11-13 17:54 ` Andrew Jones 2017-11-13 17:54 ` Andrew Jones 2017-12-03 19:50 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-12-03 19:50 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-12-04 10:05 ` Andrew Jones 2017-12-04 10:05 ` Andrew Jones 2017-10-12 10:41 ` [PATCH 24/37] KVM: arm64: Prepare to handle traps on deferred EL0 sysregs Christoffer Dall 2017-10-12 10:41 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-11-15 9:25 ` Julien Thierry 2017-11-15 9:25 ` Julien Thierry 2017-12-03 19:51 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-12-03 19:51 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-10-12 10:41 ` [PATCH 25/37] KVM: arm64: Prepare to handle traps on remaining deferred EL1 sysregs Christoffer Dall 2017-10-12 10:41 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-11-13 18:56 ` Andrew Jones 2017-11-13 18:56 ` Andrew Jones 2017-12-03 20:29 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-12-03 20:29 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-10-12 10:41 ` [PATCH 26/37] KVM: arm64: Prepare to handle traps on deferred AArch32 sysregs Christoffer Dall 2017-10-12 10:41 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-11-13 19:07 ` Andrew Jones 2017-11-13 19:07 ` Andrew Jones 2017-12-03 20:35 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-12-03 20:35 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-10-12 10:41 ` [PATCH 27/37] KVM: arm64: Defer saving/restoring system registers to vcpu load/put on VHE Christoffer Dall 2017-10-12 10:41 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-10-12 10:41 ` [PATCH 28/37] KVM: arm64: Move common VHE/non-VHE trap config in separate functions Christoffer Dall 2017-10-12 10:41 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-11-25 10:43 ` Yury Norov 2017-11-25 10:43 ` Yury Norov 2017-11-25 10:49 ` Russell King - ARM Linux 2017-11-25 10:49 ` Russell King - ARM Linux 2017-10-12 10:41 ` [PATCH 29/37] KVM: arm64: Configure FPSIMD traps on vcpu load/put for VHE Christoffer Dall 2017-10-12 10:41 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-10-12 10:41 ` [PATCH 30/37] KVM: arm64: Configure c15, PMU, and debug register traps on cpu " Christoffer Dall 2017-10-12 10:41 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-10-12 10:41 ` [PATCH 31/37] KVM: arm64: Separate activate_traps and deactive_traps for VHE and non-VHE Christoffer Dall 2017-10-12 10:41 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-10-12 10:41 ` [PATCH 32/37] KVM: arm/arm64: Handle VGICv2 save/restore from the main VGIC code Christoffer Dall 2017-10-12 10:41 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-11-15 17:50 ` Andre Przywara 2017-11-15 17:50 ` Andre Przywara 2017-11-26 10:29 ` Yury Norov 2017-11-26 10:29 ` Yury Norov 2017-11-26 19:46 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-11-26 19:46 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-11-30 12:09 ` Yury Norov 2017-11-30 12:09 ` Yury Norov 2017-11-26 19:37 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-11-26 19:37 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-10-12 10:41 ` [PATCH 33/37] KVM: arm/arm64: Move arm64-only vgic-v2-sr.c file to arm64 Christoffer Dall 2017-10-12 10:41 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-11-15 17:52 ` Andre Przywara 2017-11-15 17:52 ` Andre Przywara 2017-10-12 10:41 ` [PATCH 34/37] KVM: arm/arm64: Handle VGICv3 save/restore from the main VGIC code on VHE Christoffer Dall 2017-10-12 10:41 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-10-12 10:41 ` [PATCH 35/37] KVM: arm/arm64: Get rid of vgic_elrsr Christoffer Dall 2017-10-12 10:41 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-11-26 14:39 ` Yury Norov 2017-11-26 14:39 ` Yury Norov 2017-11-26 19:53 ` Christoffer Dall [this message] 2017-11-26 19:53 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-10-12 10:41 ` [PATCH 36/37] KVM: arm/arm64: Move VGIC APR save/restore to vgic put/load Christoffer Dall 2017-10-12 10:41 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-11-26 15:09 ` Yury Norov 2017-11-26 15:09 ` Yury Norov 2017-11-26 19:55 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-11-26 19:55 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-10-12 10:41 ` [PATCH 37/37] KVM: arm/arm64: Avoid VGICv3 save/restore on VHE with no IRQs Christoffer Dall 2017-10-12 10:41 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-11-30 18:33 ` Yury Norov 2017-11-30 18:33 ` Yury Norov 2017-12-03 20:38 ` Christoffer Dall 2017-12-03 20:38 ` Christoffer Dall
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=20171126195340.GQ28855@cbox \ --to=cdall@linaro.org \ --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu \ --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \ --cc=marc.zyngier@arm.com \ --cc=shihwei@cs.columbia.edu \ --cc=ynorov@caviumnetworks.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.