All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
To: James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>
Cc: kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	Julien Thierry <julien.thierry.kdev@gmail.com>,
	Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
	stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] KVM: arm64: Stop writing aarch32's CSSELR into ACTLR
Date: Thu, 28 May 2020 09:57:18 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4be0c0b654f7d7c1efe9f52efb856bd8@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200526161834.29165-2-james.morse@arm.com>

Hi James,

On 2020-05-26 17:18, James Morse wrote:
> aarch32 has pairs of registers to access the high and low parts of 
> 64bit
> registers. KVM has a union of 64bit sys_regs[] and 32bit copro[]. The
> 32bit accessors read the high or low part of the 64bit sys_reg[] value
> through the union.
> 
> Both sys_reg_descs[] and cp15_regs[] list access_csselr() as the 
> accessor
> for CSSELR{,_EL1}. access_csselr() is only aware of the 64bit 
> sys_regs[],
> and expects r->reg to be 'CSSELR_EL1' in the enum, index 2 of the 64bit
> array.
> 
> cp15_regs[] uses the 32bit copro[] alias of sys_regs[]. Here CSSELR is
> c0_CSSELR which is the same location in sys_reg[]. r->reg is 
> 'c0_CSSELR',
> index 4 in the 32bit array.
> 
> access_csselr() uses the 32bit r->reg value to access the 64bit array,
> so reads and write the wrong value. sys_regs[4], is ACTLR_EL1, which
> is subsequently save/restored when we enter the guest.

Huhuh... Nice catch.

> 
> ACTLR_EL1 is supposed to be read-only for the guest. This register
> only affects execution at EL1, and the host's value is restored before
> we return to host EL1.
> 
> Rename access_csselr() to access_csselr_el1(), to indicate it expects
> the 64bit register index, and pass it CSSELR_EL1 from cp15_regs[].
> 
> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
> Signed-off-by: James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>
> ----
> Providing access_csselr_cp15() wouldn't work as with VHE CSSELR_EL1 is
> loaded on the CPU while this code runs. access_csselr_cp15() would have
> to map it back the 64bit resgister to use vcpu_write_sys_reg(). We may
> as well do it in the table.
> 
>  arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c | 6 +++---
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c
> index 51db934702b6..2eda539f3281 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c
> @@ -1302,7 +1302,7 @@ static bool access_clidr(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
> struct sys_reg_params *p,
>  	return true;
>  }
> 
> -static bool access_csselr(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct sys_reg_params 
> *p,
> +static bool access_csselr_el1(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct 
> sys_reg_params *p,
>  			  const struct sys_reg_desc *r)
>  {
>  	if (p->is_write)
> @@ -1566,7 +1566,7 @@ static const struct sys_reg_desc sys_reg_descs[] 
> = {
> 
>  	{ SYS_DESC(SYS_CCSIDR_EL1), access_ccsidr },
>  	{ SYS_DESC(SYS_CLIDR_EL1), access_clidr },
> -	{ SYS_DESC(SYS_CSSELR_EL1), access_csselr, reset_unknown, CSSELR_EL1 
> },
> +	{ SYS_DESC(SYS_CSSELR_EL1), access_csselr_el1, reset_unknown, 
> CSSELR_EL1 },
>  	{ SYS_DESC(SYS_CTR_EL0), access_ctr },
> 
>  	{ SYS_DESC(SYS_PMCR_EL0), access_pmcr, reset_pmcr, PMCR_EL0 },
> @@ -2060,7 +2060,7 @@ static const struct sys_reg_desc cp15_regs[] = {
> 
>  	{ Op1(1), CRn( 0), CRm( 0), Op2(0), access_ccsidr },
>  	{ Op1(1), CRn( 0), CRm( 0), Op2(1), access_clidr },
> -	{ Op1(2), CRn( 0), CRm( 0), Op2(0), access_csselr, NULL, c0_CSSELR },
> +	{ Op1(2), CRn( 0), CRm( 0), Op2(0), access_csselr_el1, NULL, 
> CSSELR_EL1 },
>  };
> 
>  static const struct sys_reg_desc cp15_64_regs[] = {

This is a departure from the way we deal with 32bit CP15 registers.
We deal with this exact issue in a very different way for other
CP15 regs, by adjusting the index in the sys_regs array (see the
way we handle the VM regs).

How about something like this (untested):

diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c
index 12d07e7ced82..515c0c11a668 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c
+++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c
@@ -1321,10 +1321,16 @@ static bool access_clidr(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, 
struct sys_reg_params *p,
  static bool access_csselr(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct sys_reg_params 
*p,
  			  const struct sys_reg_desc *r)
  {
+	int reg = r->reg;
+
+	/* See the 32bit mapping in kvm_host.h */
+	if (p->is_aarch32)
+		reg = r->reg / 2;
+
  	if (p->is_write)
-		vcpu_write_sys_reg(vcpu, p->regval, r->reg);
+		vcpu_write_sys_reg(vcpu, p->regval, reg);
  	else
-		p->regval = vcpu_read_sys_reg(vcpu, r->reg);
+		p->regval = vcpu_read_sys_reg(vcpu, reg);
  	return true;
  }

Ideally, I'd like the core sys_reg code to deal with this sort
of funnies, but I'm trying to keep the change minimal...

Thanks,

          M.
-- 
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
To: James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org, kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] KVM: arm64: Stop writing aarch32's CSSELR into ACTLR
Date: Thu, 28 May 2020 09:57:18 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4be0c0b654f7d7c1efe9f52efb856bd8@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200526161834.29165-2-james.morse@arm.com>

Hi James,

On 2020-05-26 17:18, James Morse wrote:
> aarch32 has pairs of registers to access the high and low parts of 
> 64bit
> registers. KVM has a union of 64bit sys_regs[] and 32bit copro[]. The
> 32bit accessors read the high or low part of the 64bit sys_reg[] value
> through the union.
> 
> Both sys_reg_descs[] and cp15_regs[] list access_csselr() as the 
> accessor
> for CSSELR{,_EL1}. access_csselr() is only aware of the 64bit 
> sys_regs[],
> and expects r->reg to be 'CSSELR_EL1' in the enum, index 2 of the 64bit
> array.
> 
> cp15_regs[] uses the 32bit copro[] alias of sys_regs[]. Here CSSELR is
> c0_CSSELR which is the same location in sys_reg[]. r->reg is 
> 'c0_CSSELR',
> index 4 in the 32bit array.
> 
> access_csselr() uses the 32bit r->reg value to access the 64bit array,
> so reads and write the wrong value. sys_regs[4], is ACTLR_EL1, which
> is subsequently save/restored when we enter the guest.

Huhuh... Nice catch.

> 
> ACTLR_EL1 is supposed to be read-only for the guest. This register
> only affects execution at EL1, and the host's value is restored before
> we return to host EL1.
> 
> Rename access_csselr() to access_csselr_el1(), to indicate it expects
> the 64bit register index, and pass it CSSELR_EL1 from cp15_regs[].
> 
> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
> Signed-off-by: James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>
> ----
> Providing access_csselr_cp15() wouldn't work as with VHE CSSELR_EL1 is
> loaded on the CPU while this code runs. access_csselr_cp15() would have
> to map it back the 64bit resgister to use vcpu_write_sys_reg(). We may
> as well do it in the table.
> 
>  arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c | 6 +++---
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c
> index 51db934702b6..2eda539f3281 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c
> @@ -1302,7 +1302,7 @@ static bool access_clidr(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
> struct sys_reg_params *p,
>  	return true;
>  }
> 
> -static bool access_csselr(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct sys_reg_params 
> *p,
> +static bool access_csselr_el1(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct 
> sys_reg_params *p,
>  			  const struct sys_reg_desc *r)
>  {
>  	if (p->is_write)
> @@ -1566,7 +1566,7 @@ static const struct sys_reg_desc sys_reg_descs[] 
> = {
> 
>  	{ SYS_DESC(SYS_CCSIDR_EL1), access_ccsidr },
>  	{ SYS_DESC(SYS_CLIDR_EL1), access_clidr },
> -	{ SYS_DESC(SYS_CSSELR_EL1), access_csselr, reset_unknown, CSSELR_EL1 
> },
> +	{ SYS_DESC(SYS_CSSELR_EL1), access_csselr_el1, reset_unknown, 
> CSSELR_EL1 },
>  	{ SYS_DESC(SYS_CTR_EL0), access_ctr },
> 
>  	{ SYS_DESC(SYS_PMCR_EL0), access_pmcr, reset_pmcr, PMCR_EL0 },
> @@ -2060,7 +2060,7 @@ static const struct sys_reg_desc cp15_regs[] = {
> 
>  	{ Op1(1), CRn( 0), CRm( 0), Op2(0), access_ccsidr },
>  	{ Op1(1), CRn( 0), CRm( 0), Op2(1), access_clidr },
> -	{ Op1(2), CRn( 0), CRm( 0), Op2(0), access_csselr, NULL, c0_CSSELR },
> +	{ Op1(2), CRn( 0), CRm( 0), Op2(0), access_csselr_el1, NULL, 
> CSSELR_EL1 },
>  };
> 
>  static const struct sys_reg_desc cp15_64_regs[] = {

This is a departure from the way we deal with 32bit CP15 registers.
We deal with this exact issue in a very different way for other
CP15 regs, by adjusting the index in the sys_regs array (see the
way we handle the VM regs).

How about something like this (untested):

diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c
index 12d07e7ced82..515c0c11a668 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c
+++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c
@@ -1321,10 +1321,16 @@ static bool access_clidr(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, 
struct sys_reg_params *p,
  static bool access_csselr(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct sys_reg_params 
*p,
  			  const struct sys_reg_desc *r)
  {
+	int reg = r->reg;
+
+	/* See the 32bit mapping in kvm_host.h */
+	if (p->is_aarch32)
+		reg = r->reg / 2;
+
  	if (p->is_write)
-		vcpu_write_sys_reg(vcpu, p->regval, r->reg);
+		vcpu_write_sys_reg(vcpu, p->regval, reg);
  	else
-		p->regval = vcpu_read_sys_reg(vcpu, r->reg);
+		p->regval = vcpu_read_sys_reg(vcpu, reg);
  	return true;
  }

Ideally, I'd like the core sys_reg code to deal with this sort
of funnies, but I'm trying to keep the change minimal...

Thanks,

          M.
-- 
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...
_______________________________________________
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: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
To: James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org,
	Julien Thierry <julien.thierry.kdev@gmail.com>,
	kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] KVM: arm64: Stop writing aarch32's CSSELR into ACTLR
Date: Thu, 28 May 2020 09:57:18 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4be0c0b654f7d7c1efe9f52efb856bd8@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200526161834.29165-2-james.morse@arm.com>

Hi James,

On 2020-05-26 17:18, James Morse wrote:
> aarch32 has pairs of registers to access the high and low parts of 
> 64bit
> registers. KVM has a union of 64bit sys_regs[] and 32bit copro[]. The
> 32bit accessors read the high or low part of the 64bit sys_reg[] value
> through the union.
> 
> Both sys_reg_descs[] and cp15_regs[] list access_csselr() as the 
> accessor
> for CSSELR{,_EL1}. access_csselr() is only aware of the 64bit 
> sys_regs[],
> and expects r->reg to be 'CSSELR_EL1' in the enum, index 2 of the 64bit
> array.
> 
> cp15_regs[] uses the 32bit copro[] alias of sys_regs[]. Here CSSELR is
> c0_CSSELR which is the same location in sys_reg[]. r->reg is 
> 'c0_CSSELR',
> index 4 in the 32bit array.
> 
> access_csselr() uses the 32bit r->reg value to access the 64bit array,
> so reads and write the wrong value. sys_regs[4], is ACTLR_EL1, which
> is subsequently save/restored when we enter the guest.

Huhuh... Nice catch.

> 
> ACTLR_EL1 is supposed to be read-only for the guest. This register
> only affects execution at EL1, and the host's value is restored before
> we return to host EL1.
> 
> Rename access_csselr() to access_csselr_el1(), to indicate it expects
> the 64bit register index, and pass it CSSELR_EL1 from cp15_regs[].
> 
> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
> Signed-off-by: James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>
> ----
> Providing access_csselr_cp15() wouldn't work as with VHE CSSELR_EL1 is
> loaded on the CPU while this code runs. access_csselr_cp15() would have
> to map it back the 64bit resgister to use vcpu_write_sys_reg(). We may
> as well do it in the table.
> 
>  arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c | 6 +++---
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c
> index 51db934702b6..2eda539f3281 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c
> @@ -1302,7 +1302,7 @@ static bool access_clidr(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
> struct sys_reg_params *p,
>  	return true;
>  }
> 
> -static bool access_csselr(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct sys_reg_params 
> *p,
> +static bool access_csselr_el1(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct 
> sys_reg_params *p,
>  			  const struct sys_reg_desc *r)
>  {
>  	if (p->is_write)
> @@ -1566,7 +1566,7 @@ static const struct sys_reg_desc sys_reg_descs[] 
> = {
> 
>  	{ SYS_DESC(SYS_CCSIDR_EL1), access_ccsidr },
>  	{ SYS_DESC(SYS_CLIDR_EL1), access_clidr },
> -	{ SYS_DESC(SYS_CSSELR_EL1), access_csselr, reset_unknown, CSSELR_EL1 
> },
> +	{ SYS_DESC(SYS_CSSELR_EL1), access_csselr_el1, reset_unknown, 
> CSSELR_EL1 },
>  	{ SYS_DESC(SYS_CTR_EL0), access_ctr },
> 
>  	{ SYS_DESC(SYS_PMCR_EL0), access_pmcr, reset_pmcr, PMCR_EL0 },
> @@ -2060,7 +2060,7 @@ static const struct sys_reg_desc cp15_regs[] = {
> 
>  	{ Op1(1), CRn( 0), CRm( 0), Op2(0), access_ccsidr },
>  	{ Op1(1), CRn( 0), CRm( 0), Op2(1), access_clidr },
> -	{ Op1(2), CRn( 0), CRm( 0), Op2(0), access_csselr, NULL, c0_CSSELR },
> +	{ Op1(2), CRn( 0), CRm( 0), Op2(0), access_csselr_el1, NULL, 
> CSSELR_EL1 },
>  };
> 
>  static const struct sys_reg_desc cp15_64_regs[] = {

This is a departure from the way we deal with 32bit CP15 registers.
We deal with this exact issue in a very different way for other
CP15 regs, by adjusting the index in the sys_regs array (see the
way we handle the VM regs).

How about something like this (untested):

diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c
index 12d07e7ced82..515c0c11a668 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c
+++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c
@@ -1321,10 +1321,16 @@ static bool access_clidr(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, 
struct sys_reg_params *p,
  static bool access_csselr(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct sys_reg_params 
*p,
  			  const struct sys_reg_desc *r)
  {
+	int reg = r->reg;
+
+	/* See the 32bit mapping in kvm_host.h */
+	if (p->is_aarch32)
+		reg = r->reg / 2;
+
  	if (p->is_write)
-		vcpu_write_sys_reg(vcpu, p->regval, r->reg);
+		vcpu_write_sys_reg(vcpu, p->regval, reg);
  	else
-		p->regval = vcpu_read_sys_reg(vcpu, r->reg);
+		p->regval = vcpu_read_sys_reg(vcpu, reg);
  	return true;
  }

Ideally, I'd like the core sys_reg code to deal with this sort
of funnies, but I'm trying to keep the change minimal...

Thanks,

          M.
-- 
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...

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

  parent reply	other threads:[~2020-05-28  8:57 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-05-26 16:18 [PATCH 0/3] KVM: arm64: aarch32 ACTLR accesses James Morse
2020-05-26 16:18 ` James Morse
2020-05-26 16:18 ` [PATCH 1/3] KVM: arm64: Stop writing aarch32's CSSELR into ACTLR James Morse
2020-05-26 16:18   ` James Morse
2020-05-26 16:18   ` James Morse
2020-05-27 16:57   ` Sasha Levin
2020-05-27 16:57     ` Sasha Levin
2020-05-27 16:57     ` Sasha Levin
2020-05-28  8:57   ` Marc Zyngier [this message]
2020-05-28  8:57     ` Marc Zyngier
2020-05-28  8:57     ` Marc Zyngier
2020-05-28 11:59     ` James Morse
2020-05-28 11:59       ` James Morse
2020-05-28 11:59       ` James Morse
2020-05-28 12:10       ` Marc Zyngier
2020-05-28 12:10         ` Marc Zyngier
2020-05-28 12:10         ` Marc Zyngier
2020-05-26 16:18 ` [PATCH 2/3] KVM: arm64: Stop save/restoring ACTLR_EL1 James Morse
2020-05-26 16:18   ` James Morse
2020-05-28 12:36   ` Marc Zyngier
2020-05-28 12:36     ` Marc Zyngier
2020-05-28 12:38     ` Marc Zyngier
2020-05-28 12:38       ` Marc Zyngier
2020-05-28 12:55       ` James Morse
2020-05-28 12:55         ` James Morse
2020-05-26 16:18 ` [PATCH 3/3] KVM: arm64: Add emulation for 32bit guests accessing ACTLR2 James Morse
2020-05-26 16:18   ` James Morse
2020-05-28 12:51   ` Marc Zyngier
2020-05-28 12:51     ` Marc Zyngier
2020-05-31 13:37 ` [PATCH 0/3] KVM: arm64: aarch32 ACTLR accesses Marc Zyngier
2020-05-31 13:37   ` Marc Zyngier

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=4be0c0b654f7d7c1efe9f52efb856bd8@kernel.org \
    --to=maz@kernel.org \
    --cc=james.morse@arm.com \
    --cc=julien.thierry.kdev@gmail.com \
    --cc=kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=suzuki.poulose@arm.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.