All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
To: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com>
Cc: catalin.marinas@arm.com, maz@kernel.org, james.morse@arm.com,
	julien.thierry.kdev@gmail.com, suzuki.poulose@arm.com,
	android-kvm@google.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	kernel-team@android.com, kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, tabba@google.com,
	mark.rutland@arm.com, dbrazdil@google.com, mate.toth-pal@arm.com,
	seanjc@google.com, robh+dt@kernel.org, ardb@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 28/34] KVM: arm64: Use page-table to track page ownership
Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2021 09:32:06 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210312093205.GB32016@willie-the-truck> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YEsIxA/fKaDlSaio@google.com>

On Fri, Mar 12, 2021 at 06:23:00AM +0000, Quentin Perret wrote:
> On Thursday 11 Mar 2021 at 18:38:36 (+0000), Will Deacon wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 05:57:45PM +0000, Quentin Perret wrote:
> > > As the host stage 2 will be identity mapped, all the .hyp memory regions
> > > and/or memory pages donated to protected guestis will have to marked
> > > invalid in the host stage 2 page-table. At the same time, the hypervisor
> > > will need a way to track the ownership of each physical page to ensure
> > > memory sharing or donation between entities (host, guests, hypervisor) is
> > > legal.
> > > 
> > > In order to enable this tracking at EL2, let's use the host stage 2
> > > page-table itself. The idea is to use the top bits of invalid mappings
> > > to store the unique identifier of the page owner. The page-table owner
> > > (the host) gets identifier 0 such that, at boot time, it owns the entire
> > > IPA space as the pgd starts zeroed.
> > > 
> > > Provide kvm_pgtable_stage2_set_owner() which allows to modify the
> > > ownership of pages in the host stage 2. It re-uses most of the map()
> > > logic, but ends up creating invalid mappings instead. This impacts
> > > how we do refcount as we now need to count invalid mappings when they
> > > are used for ownership tracking.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com>
> > > ---
> > >  arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_pgtable.h | 21 +++++++
> > >  arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/pgtable.c         | 92 ++++++++++++++++++++++++----
> > >  2 files changed, 101 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_pgtable.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_pgtable.h
> > > index 4ae19247837b..b09af4612656 100644
> > > --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_pgtable.h
> > > +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_pgtable.h
> > > @@ -238,6 +238,27 @@ int kvm_pgtable_stage2_map(struct kvm_pgtable *pgt, u64 addr, u64 size,
> > >  			   u64 phys, enum kvm_pgtable_prot prot,
> > >  			   void *mc);
> > >  
> > > +/**
> > > + * kvm_pgtable_stage2_set_owner() - Annotate invalid mappings with metadata
> > > + *				    encoding the ownership of a page in the
> > > + *				    IPA space.
> > > + * @pgt:	Page-table structure initialised by kvm_pgtable_stage2_init().
> > > + * @addr:	Intermediate physical address at which to place the annotation.
> > 
> > This confused me a bit, as the annotation is stored in the page-table, not
> > at the memory identified by @addr. How about:
> > 
> >   "Base intermediate physical address to annotate"
> > 
> > > + * @size:	Size of the IPA range to annotate.
> > 
> >   "Size of the annotated range"
> > 
> > > + * @mc:		Cache of pre-allocated and zeroed memory from which to allocate
> > > + *		page-table pages.
> > > + * @owner_id:	Unique identifier for the owner of the page.
> > > + *
> > > + * The page-table owner has identifier 0.
> > 
> > Perhaps, "By default, all page-tables are owned by identifier 0"
> 
> Ack all of the above.
> 
> > > + *
> > > + * Return: 0 on success, negative error code on failure.
> > > + */
> > > +int kvm_pgtable_stage2_set_owner(struct kvm_pgtable *pgt, u64 addr, u64 size,
> > > +				 void *mc, u32 owner_id);
> > 
> > Is there a need for the owner_id to be 32-bit rather than e.g. 16-bit? Just
> > strikes me that it might be difficult to recover these bits in future if we
> > give them out freely now.
> 
> I figured we might want to use identifiers that are stable for the
> lifetime of protected VMs. I wasn't sure using e.g. VMIDs would be a
> better choice here as re-using them will cause a lot of pain for the
> host stage 2 pgtable maintenance.

I'm not saying to use the VMID directly, just that allocating half of the
pte feels a bit OTT given that the state of things after this patch series
is that we're using exactly 1 bit.

> > > @@ -517,28 +543,36 @@ static int stage2_map_walker_try_leaf(u64 addr, u64 end, u32 level,
> > >  	if (!kvm_block_mapping_supported(addr, end, phys, level))
> > >  		return -E2BIG;
> > >  
> > > -	new = kvm_init_valid_leaf_pte(phys, data->attr, level);
> > > -	if (kvm_pte_valid(old)) {
> > > +	if (kvm_pte_valid(data->attr))
> > 
> > This feels like a bit of a hack to me: the 'attr' field in stage2_map_data
> > is intended to correspond directly to the lower/upper attributes of the
> > descriptor as per the architecture, so tagging the valid bit in there is
> > pretty grotty. However, I can see the significant advantage in being able
> > to re-use the stage2_map_walker functionality, so about instead of nobbling
> > attr, you set phys to something invalid instead, e.g.:
> > 
> > 	#define KVM_PHYS_SET_OWNER	(-1ULL)
> 
> That'll confuse kvm_block_mapping_supported() and friends I think, at
> least in their current form. If you _really_ don't like this, maybe we
> could have an extra 'flags' field in stage2_map_data?

I was pondering this last night and I thought of two ways to do it:

1. Add a 'bool valid' and then stick the owner and the phys in a union.
   (yes, you'll need to update the block mapping checks to look at the
    valid flag)

2. Go with my latter suggestion:

> > Is there ever a reason to use kvm_pgtable_stage2_set_owner() to set an
> > owner of 0, or should you just use the map/unmap APIs for that? If so,
> > then maybe the key is simply if owner_id is non-zero, then an invalid
> > entry is installed?
> 
> I couldn't find a good reason to restrict it, as that wouldn't change
> the implementation much anyway. Also, if we added the right CMOs, we
> could probably remove the unmap walker and re-express it in terms of
> set_owner(0) ... But I suppose that is for later :-)

The idea being that if owner is 0, then we install a mapping for phys, but
if owner is !0 then we set the invalid mapping.

(1) is probably the less hacky option... what do you reckon?

Will

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
To: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com>
Cc: android-kvm@google.com, catalin.marinas@arm.com,
	mate.toth-pal@arm.com, seanjc@google.com, tabba@google.com,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, robh+dt@kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, maz@kernel.org,
	kernel-team@android.com, kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 28/34] KVM: arm64: Use page-table to track page ownership
Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2021 09:32:06 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210312093205.GB32016@willie-the-truck> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YEsIxA/fKaDlSaio@google.com>

On Fri, Mar 12, 2021 at 06:23:00AM +0000, Quentin Perret wrote:
> On Thursday 11 Mar 2021 at 18:38:36 (+0000), Will Deacon wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 05:57:45PM +0000, Quentin Perret wrote:
> > > As the host stage 2 will be identity mapped, all the .hyp memory regions
> > > and/or memory pages donated to protected guestis will have to marked
> > > invalid in the host stage 2 page-table. At the same time, the hypervisor
> > > will need a way to track the ownership of each physical page to ensure
> > > memory sharing or donation between entities (host, guests, hypervisor) is
> > > legal.
> > > 
> > > In order to enable this tracking at EL2, let's use the host stage 2
> > > page-table itself. The idea is to use the top bits of invalid mappings
> > > to store the unique identifier of the page owner. The page-table owner
> > > (the host) gets identifier 0 such that, at boot time, it owns the entire
> > > IPA space as the pgd starts zeroed.
> > > 
> > > Provide kvm_pgtable_stage2_set_owner() which allows to modify the
> > > ownership of pages in the host stage 2. It re-uses most of the map()
> > > logic, but ends up creating invalid mappings instead. This impacts
> > > how we do refcount as we now need to count invalid mappings when they
> > > are used for ownership tracking.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com>
> > > ---
> > >  arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_pgtable.h | 21 +++++++
> > >  arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/pgtable.c         | 92 ++++++++++++++++++++++++----
> > >  2 files changed, 101 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_pgtable.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_pgtable.h
> > > index 4ae19247837b..b09af4612656 100644
> > > --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_pgtable.h
> > > +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_pgtable.h
> > > @@ -238,6 +238,27 @@ int kvm_pgtable_stage2_map(struct kvm_pgtable *pgt, u64 addr, u64 size,
> > >  			   u64 phys, enum kvm_pgtable_prot prot,
> > >  			   void *mc);
> > >  
> > > +/**
> > > + * kvm_pgtable_stage2_set_owner() - Annotate invalid mappings with metadata
> > > + *				    encoding the ownership of a page in the
> > > + *				    IPA space.
> > > + * @pgt:	Page-table structure initialised by kvm_pgtable_stage2_init().
> > > + * @addr:	Intermediate physical address at which to place the annotation.
> > 
> > This confused me a bit, as the annotation is stored in the page-table, not
> > at the memory identified by @addr. How about:
> > 
> >   "Base intermediate physical address to annotate"
> > 
> > > + * @size:	Size of the IPA range to annotate.
> > 
> >   "Size of the annotated range"
> > 
> > > + * @mc:		Cache of pre-allocated and zeroed memory from which to allocate
> > > + *		page-table pages.
> > > + * @owner_id:	Unique identifier for the owner of the page.
> > > + *
> > > + * The page-table owner has identifier 0.
> > 
> > Perhaps, "By default, all page-tables are owned by identifier 0"
> 
> Ack all of the above.
> 
> > > + *
> > > + * Return: 0 on success, negative error code on failure.
> > > + */
> > > +int kvm_pgtable_stage2_set_owner(struct kvm_pgtable *pgt, u64 addr, u64 size,
> > > +				 void *mc, u32 owner_id);
> > 
> > Is there a need for the owner_id to be 32-bit rather than e.g. 16-bit? Just
> > strikes me that it might be difficult to recover these bits in future if we
> > give them out freely now.
> 
> I figured we might want to use identifiers that are stable for the
> lifetime of protected VMs. I wasn't sure using e.g. VMIDs would be a
> better choice here as re-using them will cause a lot of pain for the
> host stage 2 pgtable maintenance.

I'm not saying to use the VMID directly, just that allocating half of the
pte feels a bit OTT given that the state of things after this patch series
is that we're using exactly 1 bit.

> > > @@ -517,28 +543,36 @@ static int stage2_map_walker_try_leaf(u64 addr, u64 end, u32 level,
> > >  	if (!kvm_block_mapping_supported(addr, end, phys, level))
> > >  		return -E2BIG;
> > >  
> > > -	new = kvm_init_valid_leaf_pte(phys, data->attr, level);
> > > -	if (kvm_pte_valid(old)) {
> > > +	if (kvm_pte_valid(data->attr))
> > 
> > This feels like a bit of a hack to me: the 'attr' field in stage2_map_data
> > is intended to correspond directly to the lower/upper attributes of the
> > descriptor as per the architecture, so tagging the valid bit in there is
> > pretty grotty. However, I can see the significant advantage in being able
> > to re-use the stage2_map_walker functionality, so about instead of nobbling
> > attr, you set phys to something invalid instead, e.g.:
> > 
> > 	#define KVM_PHYS_SET_OWNER	(-1ULL)
> 
> That'll confuse kvm_block_mapping_supported() and friends I think, at
> least in their current form. If you _really_ don't like this, maybe we
> could have an extra 'flags' field in stage2_map_data?

I was pondering this last night and I thought of two ways to do it:

1. Add a 'bool valid' and then stick the owner and the phys in a union.
   (yes, you'll need to update the block mapping checks to look at the
    valid flag)

2. Go with my latter suggestion:

> > Is there ever a reason to use kvm_pgtable_stage2_set_owner() to set an
> > owner of 0, or should you just use the map/unmap APIs for that? If so,
> > then maybe the key is simply if owner_id is non-zero, then an invalid
> > entry is installed?
> 
> I couldn't find a good reason to restrict it, as that wouldn't change
> the implementation much anyway. Also, if we added the right CMOs, we
> could probably remove the unmap walker and re-express it in terms of
> set_owner(0) ... But I suppose that is for later :-)

The idea being that if owner is 0, then we install a mapping for phys, but
if owner is !0 then we set the invalid mapping.

(1) is probably the less hacky option... what do you reckon?

Will
_______________________________________________
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: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
To: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com>
Cc: catalin.marinas@arm.com, maz@kernel.org, james.morse@arm.com,
	julien.thierry.kdev@gmail.com, suzuki.poulose@arm.com,
	android-kvm@google.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	kernel-team@android.com, kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, tabba@google.com,
	mark.rutland@arm.com, dbrazdil@google.com, mate.toth-pal@arm.com,
	seanjc@google.com, robh+dt@kernel.org, ardb@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 28/34] KVM: arm64: Use page-table to track page ownership
Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2021 09:32:06 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210312093205.GB32016@willie-the-truck> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YEsIxA/fKaDlSaio@google.com>

On Fri, Mar 12, 2021 at 06:23:00AM +0000, Quentin Perret wrote:
> On Thursday 11 Mar 2021 at 18:38:36 (+0000), Will Deacon wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 05:57:45PM +0000, Quentin Perret wrote:
> > > As the host stage 2 will be identity mapped, all the .hyp memory regions
> > > and/or memory pages donated to protected guestis will have to marked
> > > invalid in the host stage 2 page-table. At the same time, the hypervisor
> > > will need a way to track the ownership of each physical page to ensure
> > > memory sharing or donation between entities (host, guests, hypervisor) is
> > > legal.
> > > 
> > > In order to enable this tracking at EL2, let's use the host stage 2
> > > page-table itself. The idea is to use the top bits of invalid mappings
> > > to store the unique identifier of the page owner. The page-table owner
> > > (the host) gets identifier 0 such that, at boot time, it owns the entire
> > > IPA space as the pgd starts zeroed.
> > > 
> > > Provide kvm_pgtable_stage2_set_owner() which allows to modify the
> > > ownership of pages in the host stage 2. It re-uses most of the map()
> > > logic, but ends up creating invalid mappings instead. This impacts
> > > how we do refcount as we now need to count invalid mappings when they
> > > are used for ownership tracking.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com>
> > > ---
> > >  arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_pgtable.h | 21 +++++++
> > >  arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/pgtable.c         | 92 ++++++++++++++++++++++++----
> > >  2 files changed, 101 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_pgtable.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_pgtable.h
> > > index 4ae19247837b..b09af4612656 100644
> > > --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_pgtable.h
> > > +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_pgtable.h
> > > @@ -238,6 +238,27 @@ int kvm_pgtable_stage2_map(struct kvm_pgtable *pgt, u64 addr, u64 size,
> > >  			   u64 phys, enum kvm_pgtable_prot prot,
> > >  			   void *mc);
> > >  
> > > +/**
> > > + * kvm_pgtable_stage2_set_owner() - Annotate invalid mappings with metadata
> > > + *				    encoding the ownership of a page in the
> > > + *				    IPA space.
> > > + * @pgt:	Page-table structure initialised by kvm_pgtable_stage2_init().
> > > + * @addr:	Intermediate physical address at which to place the annotation.
> > 
> > This confused me a bit, as the annotation is stored in the page-table, not
> > at the memory identified by @addr. How about:
> > 
> >   "Base intermediate physical address to annotate"
> > 
> > > + * @size:	Size of the IPA range to annotate.
> > 
> >   "Size of the annotated range"
> > 
> > > + * @mc:		Cache of pre-allocated and zeroed memory from which to allocate
> > > + *		page-table pages.
> > > + * @owner_id:	Unique identifier for the owner of the page.
> > > + *
> > > + * The page-table owner has identifier 0.
> > 
> > Perhaps, "By default, all page-tables are owned by identifier 0"
> 
> Ack all of the above.
> 
> > > + *
> > > + * Return: 0 on success, negative error code on failure.
> > > + */
> > > +int kvm_pgtable_stage2_set_owner(struct kvm_pgtable *pgt, u64 addr, u64 size,
> > > +				 void *mc, u32 owner_id);
> > 
> > Is there a need for the owner_id to be 32-bit rather than e.g. 16-bit? Just
> > strikes me that it might be difficult to recover these bits in future if we
> > give them out freely now.
> 
> I figured we might want to use identifiers that are stable for the
> lifetime of protected VMs. I wasn't sure using e.g. VMIDs would be a
> better choice here as re-using them will cause a lot of pain for the
> host stage 2 pgtable maintenance.

I'm not saying to use the VMID directly, just that allocating half of the
pte feels a bit OTT given that the state of things after this patch series
is that we're using exactly 1 bit.

> > > @@ -517,28 +543,36 @@ static int stage2_map_walker_try_leaf(u64 addr, u64 end, u32 level,
> > >  	if (!kvm_block_mapping_supported(addr, end, phys, level))
> > >  		return -E2BIG;
> > >  
> > > -	new = kvm_init_valid_leaf_pte(phys, data->attr, level);
> > > -	if (kvm_pte_valid(old)) {
> > > +	if (kvm_pte_valid(data->attr))
> > 
> > This feels like a bit of a hack to me: the 'attr' field in stage2_map_data
> > is intended to correspond directly to the lower/upper attributes of the
> > descriptor as per the architecture, so tagging the valid bit in there is
> > pretty grotty. However, I can see the significant advantage in being able
> > to re-use the stage2_map_walker functionality, so about instead of nobbling
> > attr, you set phys to something invalid instead, e.g.:
> > 
> > 	#define KVM_PHYS_SET_OWNER	(-1ULL)
> 
> That'll confuse kvm_block_mapping_supported() and friends I think, at
> least in their current form. If you _really_ don't like this, maybe we
> could have an extra 'flags' field in stage2_map_data?

I was pondering this last night and I thought of two ways to do it:

1. Add a 'bool valid' and then stick the owner and the phys in a union.
   (yes, you'll need to update the block mapping checks to look at the
    valid flag)

2. Go with my latter suggestion:

> > Is there ever a reason to use kvm_pgtable_stage2_set_owner() to set an
> > owner of 0, or should you just use the map/unmap APIs for that? If so,
> > then maybe the key is simply if owner_id is non-zero, then an invalid
> > entry is installed?
> 
> I couldn't find a good reason to restrict it, as that wouldn't change
> the implementation much anyway. Also, if we added the right CMOs, we
> could probably remove the unmap walker and re-express it in terms of
> set_owner(0) ... But I suppose that is for later :-)

The idea being that if owner is 0, then we install a mapping for phys, but
if owner is !0 then we set the invalid mapping.

(1) is probably the less hacky option... what do you reckon?

Will

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

  reply	other threads:[~2021-03-12  9:32 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 177+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-03-10 17:57 [PATCH v4 00/34] KVM: arm64: A stage 2 for the host Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57 ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57 ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57 ` [PATCH v4 01/34] arm64: lib: Annotate {clear,copy}_page() as position-independent Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57   ` [PATCH v4 01/34] arm64: lib: Annotate {clear, copy}_page() " Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57   ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57 ` [PATCH v4 02/34] KVM: arm64: Link position-independent string routines into .hyp.text Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57   ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57   ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57 ` [PATCH v4 03/34] arm64: kvm: Add standalone ticket spinlock implementation for use at hyp Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57   ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57   ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57 ` [PATCH v4 04/34] KVM: arm64: Initialize kvm_nvhe_init_params early Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57   ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57   ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57 ` [PATCH v4 05/34] KVM: arm64: Avoid free_page() in page-table allocator Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57   ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57   ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57 ` [PATCH v4 06/34] KVM: arm64: Factor memory allocation out of pgtable.c Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57   ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57   ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-11 16:09   ` Will Deacon
2021-03-11 16:09     ` Will Deacon
2021-03-11 16:09     ` Will Deacon
2021-03-10 17:57 ` [PATCH v4 07/34] KVM: arm64: Introduce a BSS section for use at Hyp Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57   ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57   ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57 ` [PATCH v4 08/34] KVM: arm64: Make kvm_call_hyp() a function call " Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57   ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57   ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57 ` [PATCH v4 09/34] KVM: arm64: Allow using kvm_nvhe_sym() in hyp code Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57   ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57   ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57 ` [PATCH v4 10/34] KVM: arm64: Introduce an early Hyp page allocator Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57   ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57   ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57 ` [PATCH v4 11/34] KVM: arm64: Stub CONFIG_DEBUG_LIST at Hyp Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57   ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57   ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-11 16:11   ` Will Deacon
2021-03-11 16:11     ` Will Deacon
2021-03-11 16:11     ` Will Deacon
2021-03-10 17:57 ` [PATCH v4 12/34] KVM: arm64: Introduce a Hyp buddy page allocator Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57   ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57   ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-11 16:14   ` Will Deacon
2021-03-11 16:14     ` Will Deacon
2021-03-11 16:14     ` Will Deacon
2021-03-10 17:57 ` [PATCH v4 13/34] KVM: arm64: Enable access to sanitized CPU features at EL2 Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57   ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57   ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-11 19:36   ` Will Deacon
2021-03-11 19:36     ` Will Deacon
2021-03-11 19:36     ` Will Deacon
2021-03-12  6:34     ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-12  6:34       ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-12  6:34       ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-12  9:25       ` Will Deacon
2021-03-12  9:25         ` Will Deacon
2021-03-12  9:25         ` Will Deacon
2021-03-10 17:57 ` [PATCH v4 14/34] KVM: arm64: Factor out vector address calculation Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57   ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57   ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57 ` [PATCH v4 15/34] arm64: asm: Provide set_sctlr_el2 macro Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57   ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57   ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-11 16:22   ` Will Deacon
2021-03-11 16:22     ` Will Deacon
2021-03-11 16:22     ` Will Deacon
2021-03-10 17:57 ` [PATCH v4 16/34] KVM: arm64: Prepare the creation of s1 mappings at EL2 Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57   ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57   ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-11 16:21   ` Will Deacon
2021-03-11 16:21     ` Will Deacon
2021-03-11 16:21     ` Will Deacon
2021-03-10 17:57 ` [PATCH v4 17/34] KVM: arm64: Elevate hypervisor mappings creation " Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57   ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57   ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-11 17:28   ` Will Deacon
2021-03-11 17:28     ` Will Deacon
2021-03-11 17:28     ` Will Deacon
2021-03-10 17:57 ` [PATCH v4 18/34] KVM: arm64: Use kvm_arch for stage 2 pgtable Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57   ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57   ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57 ` [PATCH v4 19/34] KVM: arm64: Use kvm_arch in kvm_s2_mmu Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57   ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57   ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57 ` [PATCH v4 20/34] KVM: arm64: Set host stage 2 using kvm_nvhe_init_params Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57   ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57   ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57 ` [PATCH v4 21/34] KVM: arm64: Refactor kvm_arm_setup_stage2() Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57   ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57   ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57 ` [PATCH v4 22/34] KVM: arm64: Refactor __load_guest_stage2() Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57   ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57   ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57 ` [PATCH v4 23/34] KVM: arm64: Refactor __populate_fault_info() Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57   ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57   ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57 ` [PATCH v4 24/34] KVM: arm64: Make memcache anonymous in pgtable allocator Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57   ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57   ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57 ` [PATCH v4 25/34] KVM: arm64: Reserve memory for host stage 2 Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57   ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57   ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57 ` [PATCH v4 26/34] KVM: arm64: Sort the hypervisor memblocks Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57   ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57   ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57 ` [PATCH v4 27/34] KVM: arm64: Always zero invalid PTEs Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57   ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57   ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-11 17:33   ` Will Deacon
2021-03-11 17:33     ` Will Deacon
2021-03-11 17:33     ` Will Deacon
2021-03-12  9:15     ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-12  9:15       ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-12  9:15       ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57 ` [PATCH v4 28/34] KVM: arm64: Use page-table to track page ownership Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57   ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57   ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-11 18:38   ` Will Deacon
2021-03-11 18:38     ` Will Deacon
2021-03-11 18:38     ` Will Deacon
2021-03-12  6:23     ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-12  6:23       ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-12  6:23       ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-12  9:32       ` Will Deacon [this message]
2021-03-12  9:32         ` Will Deacon
2021-03-12  9:32         ` Will Deacon
2021-03-12 10:13         ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-12 10:13           ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-12 10:13           ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-12 11:18           ` Will Deacon
2021-03-12 11:18             ` Will Deacon
2021-03-12 11:18             ` Will Deacon
2021-03-12 11:45             ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-12 11:45               ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-12 11:45               ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57 ` [PATCH v4 29/34] KVM: arm64: Refactor stage2_map_set_prot_attr() Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57   ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57   ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-11 18:48   ` Will Deacon
2021-03-11 18:48     ` Will Deacon
2021-03-11 18:48     ` Will Deacon
2021-03-12  5:10     ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-12  5:10       ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-12  5:10       ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57 ` [PATCH v4 30/34] KVM: arm64: Add kvm_pgtable_stage2_find_range() Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57   ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57   ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-11 19:04   ` Will Deacon
2021-03-11 19:04     ` Will Deacon
2021-03-11 19:04     ` Will Deacon
2021-03-12  5:32     ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-12  5:32       ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-12  5:32       ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-12  9:40       ` Will Deacon
2021-03-12  9:40         ` Will Deacon
2021-03-12  9:40         ` Will Deacon
2021-03-10 17:57 ` [PATCH v4 31/34] KVM: arm64: Wrap the host with a stage 2 Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57   ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57   ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-11 19:09   ` Will Deacon
2021-03-11 19:09     ` Will Deacon
2021-03-11 19:09     ` Will Deacon
2021-03-10 17:57 ` [PATCH v4 32/34] KVM: arm64: Page-align the .hyp sections Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57   ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57   ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57 ` [PATCH v4 33/34] KVM: arm64: Disable PMU support in protected mode Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57   ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57   ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57 ` [PATCH v4 34/34] KVM: arm64: Protect the .hyp sections from the host Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57   ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-10 17:57   ` Quentin Perret
2021-03-11 19:17   ` Will Deacon
2021-03-11 19:17     ` Will Deacon
2021-03-11 19:17     ` Will Deacon

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=20210312093205.GB32016@willie-the-truck \
    --to=will@kernel.org \
    --cc=android-kvm@google.com \
    --cc=ardb@kernel.org \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=dbrazdil@google.com \
    --cc=james.morse@arm.com \
    --cc=julien.thierry.kdev@gmail.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=mark.rutland@arm.com \
    --cc=mate.toth-pal@arm.com \
    --cc=maz@kernel.org \
    --cc=qperret@google.com \
    --cc=robh+dt@kernel.org \
    --cc=seanjc@google.com \
    --cc=suzuki.poulose@arm.com \
    --cc=tabba@google.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: 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.