From: Fuad Tabba <tabba@google.com>
To: Quentin Perret <qperret@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 10/21] KVM: arm64: Enable forcing page-level stage-2 mappings
Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2021 12:43:30 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CA+EHjTwamSQ+msUUnuCi6c_hw5TzDy-7dSxLxEnGmA4T4uhw_Q@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YQkWuCVkKWJX81en@google.com>
Hi Quentin,
> > > +static bool stage2_block_mapping_allowed(u64 addr, u64 end, u32 level,
> > > + struct stage2_map_data *data)
> > > +{
> > > + if (data->force_pte && (level < (KVM_PGTABLE_MAX_LEVELS - 1)))
> > > + return false;
> >
> > I'm not sure I understand why checking the level is necessary. Can
> > there be block mapping at the last possible level?
>
> That's probably just a matter of naming, but this function is in fact
> called at every level, just like kvm_block_mapping_supported() was
> before. And we rely on it returning true at the last level, so I need to
> do that check here.
>
> Maybe renaming this stage2_leaf_mapping_allowed() would clarify?
Yes it would.
Thanks,
/fuad
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Fuad Tabba <tabba@google.com>
To: Quentin Perret <qperret@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 10/21] KVM: arm64: Enable forcing page-level stage-2 mappings
Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2021 12:43:30 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CA+EHjTwamSQ+msUUnuCi6c_hw5TzDy-7dSxLxEnGmA4T4uhw_Q@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YQkWuCVkKWJX81en@google.com>
Hi Quentin,
> > > +static bool stage2_block_mapping_allowed(u64 addr, u64 end, u32 level,
> > > + struct stage2_map_data *data)
> > > +{
> > > + if (data->force_pte && (level < (KVM_PGTABLE_MAX_LEVELS - 1)))
> > > + return false;
> >
> > I'm not sure I understand why checking the level is necessary. Can
> > there be block mapping at the last possible level?
>
> That's probably just a matter of naming, but this function is in fact
> called at every level, just like kvm_block_mapping_supported() was
> before. And we rely on it returning true at the last level, so I need to
> do that check here.
>
> Maybe renaming this stage2_leaf_mapping_allowed() would clarify?
Yes it would.
Thanks,
/fuad
_______________________________________________
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: Fuad Tabba <tabba@google.com>
To: Quentin Perret <qperret@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 10/21] KVM: arm64: Enable forcing page-level stage-2 mappings
Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2021 12:43:30 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CA+EHjTwamSQ+msUUnuCi6c_hw5TzDy-7dSxLxEnGmA4T4uhw_Q@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YQkWuCVkKWJX81en@google.com>
Hi Quentin,
> > > +static bool stage2_block_mapping_allowed(u64 addr, u64 end, u32 level,
> > > + struct stage2_map_data *data)
> > > +{
> > > + if (data->force_pte && (level < (KVM_PGTABLE_MAX_LEVELS - 1)))
> > > + return false;
> >
> > I'm not sure I understand why checking the level is necessary. Can
> > there be block mapping at the last possible level?
>
> That's probably just a matter of naming, but this function is in fact
> called at every level, just like kvm_block_mapping_supported() was
> before. And we rely on it returning true at the last level, so I need to
> do that check here.
>
> Maybe renaming this stage2_leaf_mapping_allowed() would clarify?
Yes it would.
Thanks,
/fuad
_______________________________________________
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 10:44 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 [this message]
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
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=CA+EHjTwamSQ+msUUnuCi6c_hw5TzDy-7dSxLxEnGmA4T4uhw_Q@mail.gmail.com \
--to=tabba@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=qperret@google.com \
--cc=qwandor@google.com \
--cc=suzuki.poulose@arm.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.