All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com>
To: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, will@kernel.org,
	dbrazdil@google.com, Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@codeaurora.org>,
	Shanker R Donthineni <sdonthineni@nvidia.com>,
	James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
	Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
	Alexandru Elisei <alexandru.elisei@arm.com>,
	kernel-team@android.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/16] KVM: arm64: Add MMIO checking infrastructure
Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2021 16:49:45 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YPbwmVk1YD9+y7tr@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87wnpl86sz.wl-maz@kernel.org>

On Tuesday 20 Jul 2021 at 14:15:56 (+0100), Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Jul 2021 12:13:20 +0100,
> Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com> wrote:
> > 
> > On Thursday 15 Jul 2021 at 17:31:47 (+0100), Marc Zyngier wrote:
> > > +struct s2_walk_data {
> > > +	kvm_pte_t	pteval;
> > > +	u32		level;
> > > +};
> > > +
> > > +static int s2_walker(u64 addr, u64 end, u32 level, kvm_pte_t *ptep,
> > > +		     enum kvm_pgtable_walk_flags flag, void * const arg)
> > > +{
> > > +	struct s2_walk_data *data = arg;
> > > +
> > > +	data->level = level;
> > > +	data->pteval = *ptep;
> > > +	return 0;
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > +/* Assumes mmu_lock taken */
> > > +static bool __check_ioguard_page(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, gpa_t ipa)
> > > +{
> > > +	struct s2_walk_data data;
> > > +	struct kvm_pgtable_walker walker = {
> > > +		.cb             = s2_walker,
> > > +		.flags          = KVM_PGTABLE_WALK_LEAF,
> > > +		.arg            = &data,
> > > +	};
> > > +
> > > +	kvm_pgtable_walk(vcpu->arch.hw_mmu->pgt, ALIGN_DOWN(ipa, PAGE_SIZE),
> > > +			 PAGE_SIZE, &walker);
> > > +
> > > +	/* Must be a PAGE_SIZE mapping with our annotation */
> > > +	return (BIT(ARM64_HW_PGTABLE_LEVEL_SHIFT(data.level)) == PAGE_SIZE &&
> > > +		data.pteval == MMIO_NOTE);
> > 
> > Nit: you could do this check in the walker directly and check the return
> > value of kvm_pgtable_walk() instead. That would allow to get rid of
> > struct s2_walk_data.
> > 
> > Also, though the compiler might be able to optimize, maybe simplify the
> > level check to level == (KVM_PGTABLE_MAX_LEVELS - 1)?
> 
> Yup, all good points. I guess I could do the same in my other series
> that parses the userspace PT to extract the level.

Well, actually, let me take that back. I think something like you have
would be useful, but in pgtable.c directly and re-usable for stage-1 and
stage-2 walks. Maybe something like the below (totally untested)?

I could use such a walker in several places as well in the memory
ownership series:

 - following the idea of [1], I could remove the
   kvm_pgtable_stage2_find_range() function entirely;

 - [2] defines 2 custom walkers that do nothing but walk host stage-2
   and hyp stage-1 page-tables to check permissions and such --  they
   could be removed/re-implemented easily as well.

And you seem to need something similar here, so clearly there is a need.
WDYT?

Thanks,
Quentin

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/kvmarm/20210719104735.3681732-3-qperret@google.com/
[2] https://lore.kernel.org/kvmarm/20210719104735.3681732-14-qperret@google.com/

diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/pgtable.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/pgtable.c
index e0ae57dca827..bd6d26f27e1a 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/pgtable.c
+++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/pgtable.c
@@ -357,6 +357,38 @@ int kvm_pgtable_walk(struct kvm_pgtable *pgt, u64 addr, u64 size,
        return _kvm_pgtable_walk(&walk_data);
 }

+struct get_leaf_data {
+       kvm_pte_t *ptep;
+       u32 *level;
+};
+
+static int get_leaf_walker(u64 addr, u64 end, u32 level, kvm_pte_t *ptep,
+                          enum kvm_pgtable_walk_flags flag, void * const arg)
+{
+       struct get_leaf_data *data = arg;
+
+       *(data->ptep) = *ptep;
+       *(data->level) = level;
+
+       return 0;
+}
+
+int kvm_pgtable_get_leaf(struct kvm_pgtable *pgt, u64 addr, kvm_pte_t *ptep,
+                        u32 *level)
+{
+       struct get_leaf_data data = {
+               .ptep = ptep,
+               .level = level,
+       };
+       struct kvm_pgtable_walker __get_leaf_walker = {
+               .cb             = get_leaf_walker,
+               .flags          = KVM_PGTABLE_WALK_LEAF,
+               .arg            = &data,
+       };
+
+       return kvm_pgtable_walk(pgt, addr, PAGE_SIZE, &__get_leaf_walker);
+}
+
 struct hyp_map_data {
        u64                             phys;
        kvm_pte_t                       attr;


WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com>
To: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
Cc: kernel-team@android.com, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
	Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@codeaurora.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Shanker R Donthineni <sdonthineni@nvidia.com>,
	will@kernel.org, kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/16] KVM: arm64: Add MMIO checking infrastructure
Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2021 16:49:45 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YPbwmVk1YD9+y7tr@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87wnpl86sz.wl-maz@kernel.org>

On Tuesday 20 Jul 2021 at 14:15:56 (+0100), Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Jul 2021 12:13:20 +0100,
> Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com> wrote:
> > 
> > On Thursday 15 Jul 2021 at 17:31:47 (+0100), Marc Zyngier wrote:
> > > +struct s2_walk_data {
> > > +	kvm_pte_t	pteval;
> > > +	u32		level;
> > > +};
> > > +
> > > +static int s2_walker(u64 addr, u64 end, u32 level, kvm_pte_t *ptep,
> > > +		     enum kvm_pgtable_walk_flags flag, void * const arg)
> > > +{
> > > +	struct s2_walk_data *data = arg;
> > > +
> > > +	data->level = level;
> > > +	data->pteval = *ptep;
> > > +	return 0;
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > +/* Assumes mmu_lock taken */
> > > +static bool __check_ioguard_page(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, gpa_t ipa)
> > > +{
> > > +	struct s2_walk_data data;
> > > +	struct kvm_pgtable_walker walker = {
> > > +		.cb             = s2_walker,
> > > +		.flags          = KVM_PGTABLE_WALK_LEAF,
> > > +		.arg            = &data,
> > > +	};
> > > +
> > > +	kvm_pgtable_walk(vcpu->arch.hw_mmu->pgt, ALIGN_DOWN(ipa, PAGE_SIZE),
> > > +			 PAGE_SIZE, &walker);
> > > +
> > > +	/* Must be a PAGE_SIZE mapping with our annotation */
> > > +	return (BIT(ARM64_HW_PGTABLE_LEVEL_SHIFT(data.level)) == PAGE_SIZE &&
> > > +		data.pteval == MMIO_NOTE);
> > 
> > Nit: you could do this check in the walker directly and check the return
> > value of kvm_pgtable_walk() instead. That would allow to get rid of
> > struct s2_walk_data.
> > 
> > Also, though the compiler might be able to optimize, maybe simplify the
> > level check to level == (KVM_PGTABLE_MAX_LEVELS - 1)?
> 
> Yup, all good points. I guess I could do the same in my other series
> that parses the userspace PT to extract the level.

Well, actually, let me take that back. I think something like you have
would be useful, but in pgtable.c directly and re-usable for stage-1 and
stage-2 walks. Maybe something like the below (totally untested)?

I could use such a walker in several places as well in the memory
ownership series:

 - following the idea of [1], I could remove the
   kvm_pgtable_stage2_find_range() function entirely;

 - [2] defines 2 custom walkers that do nothing but walk host stage-2
   and hyp stage-1 page-tables to check permissions and such --  they
   could be removed/re-implemented easily as well.

And you seem to need something similar here, so clearly there is a need.
WDYT?

Thanks,
Quentin

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/kvmarm/20210719104735.3681732-3-qperret@google.com/
[2] https://lore.kernel.org/kvmarm/20210719104735.3681732-14-qperret@google.com/

diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/pgtable.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/pgtable.c
index e0ae57dca827..bd6d26f27e1a 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/pgtable.c
+++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/pgtable.c
@@ -357,6 +357,38 @@ int kvm_pgtable_walk(struct kvm_pgtable *pgt, u64 addr, u64 size,
        return _kvm_pgtable_walk(&walk_data);
 }

+struct get_leaf_data {
+       kvm_pte_t *ptep;
+       u32 *level;
+};
+
+static int get_leaf_walker(u64 addr, u64 end, u32 level, kvm_pte_t *ptep,
+                          enum kvm_pgtable_walk_flags flag, void * const arg)
+{
+       struct get_leaf_data *data = arg;
+
+       *(data->ptep) = *ptep;
+       *(data->level) = level;
+
+       return 0;
+}
+
+int kvm_pgtable_get_leaf(struct kvm_pgtable *pgt, u64 addr, kvm_pte_t *ptep,
+                        u32 *level)
+{
+       struct get_leaf_data data = {
+               .ptep = ptep,
+               .level = level,
+       };
+       struct kvm_pgtable_walker __get_leaf_walker = {
+               .cb             = get_leaf_walker,
+               .flags          = KVM_PGTABLE_WALK_LEAF,
+               .arg            = &data,
+       };
+
+       return kvm_pgtable_walk(pgt, addr, PAGE_SIZE, &__get_leaf_walker);
+}
+
 struct hyp_map_data {
        u64                             phys;
        kvm_pte_t                       attr;

_______________________________________________
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: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com>
To: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, will@kernel.org,
	dbrazdil@google.com, Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@codeaurora.org>,
	Shanker R Donthineni <sdonthineni@nvidia.com>,
	James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
	Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
	Alexandru Elisei <alexandru.elisei@arm.com>,
	kernel-team@android.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/16] KVM: arm64: Add MMIO checking infrastructure
Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2021 16:49:45 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YPbwmVk1YD9+y7tr@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87wnpl86sz.wl-maz@kernel.org>

On Tuesday 20 Jul 2021 at 14:15:56 (+0100), Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Jul 2021 12:13:20 +0100,
> Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com> wrote:
> > 
> > On Thursday 15 Jul 2021 at 17:31:47 (+0100), Marc Zyngier wrote:
> > > +struct s2_walk_data {
> > > +	kvm_pte_t	pteval;
> > > +	u32		level;
> > > +};
> > > +
> > > +static int s2_walker(u64 addr, u64 end, u32 level, kvm_pte_t *ptep,
> > > +		     enum kvm_pgtable_walk_flags flag, void * const arg)
> > > +{
> > > +	struct s2_walk_data *data = arg;
> > > +
> > > +	data->level = level;
> > > +	data->pteval = *ptep;
> > > +	return 0;
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > +/* Assumes mmu_lock taken */
> > > +static bool __check_ioguard_page(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, gpa_t ipa)
> > > +{
> > > +	struct s2_walk_data data;
> > > +	struct kvm_pgtable_walker walker = {
> > > +		.cb             = s2_walker,
> > > +		.flags          = KVM_PGTABLE_WALK_LEAF,
> > > +		.arg            = &data,
> > > +	};
> > > +
> > > +	kvm_pgtable_walk(vcpu->arch.hw_mmu->pgt, ALIGN_DOWN(ipa, PAGE_SIZE),
> > > +			 PAGE_SIZE, &walker);
> > > +
> > > +	/* Must be a PAGE_SIZE mapping with our annotation */
> > > +	return (BIT(ARM64_HW_PGTABLE_LEVEL_SHIFT(data.level)) == PAGE_SIZE &&
> > > +		data.pteval == MMIO_NOTE);
> > 
> > Nit: you could do this check in the walker directly and check the return
> > value of kvm_pgtable_walk() instead. That would allow to get rid of
> > struct s2_walk_data.
> > 
> > Also, though the compiler might be able to optimize, maybe simplify the
> > level check to level == (KVM_PGTABLE_MAX_LEVELS - 1)?
> 
> Yup, all good points. I guess I could do the same in my other series
> that parses the userspace PT to extract the level.

Well, actually, let me take that back. I think something like you have
would be useful, but in pgtable.c directly and re-usable for stage-1 and
stage-2 walks. Maybe something like the below (totally untested)?

I could use such a walker in several places as well in the memory
ownership series:

 - following the idea of [1], I could remove the
   kvm_pgtable_stage2_find_range() function entirely;

 - [2] defines 2 custom walkers that do nothing but walk host stage-2
   and hyp stage-1 page-tables to check permissions and such --  they
   could be removed/re-implemented easily as well.

And you seem to need something similar here, so clearly there is a need.
WDYT?

Thanks,
Quentin

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/kvmarm/20210719104735.3681732-3-qperret@google.com/
[2] https://lore.kernel.org/kvmarm/20210719104735.3681732-14-qperret@google.com/

diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/pgtable.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/pgtable.c
index e0ae57dca827..bd6d26f27e1a 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/pgtable.c
+++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/pgtable.c
@@ -357,6 +357,38 @@ int kvm_pgtable_walk(struct kvm_pgtable *pgt, u64 addr, u64 size,
        return _kvm_pgtable_walk(&walk_data);
 }

+struct get_leaf_data {
+       kvm_pte_t *ptep;
+       u32 *level;
+};
+
+static int get_leaf_walker(u64 addr, u64 end, u32 level, kvm_pte_t *ptep,
+                          enum kvm_pgtable_walk_flags flag, void * const arg)
+{
+       struct get_leaf_data *data = arg;
+
+       *(data->ptep) = *ptep;
+       *(data->level) = level;
+
+       return 0;
+}
+
+int kvm_pgtable_get_leaf(struct kvm_pgtable *pgt, u64 addr, kvm_pte_t *ptep,
+                        u32 *level)
+{
+       struct get_leaf_data data = {
+               .ptep = ptep,
+               .level = level,
+       };
+       struct kvm_pgtable_walker __get_leaf_walker = {
+               .cb             = get_leaf_walker,
+               .flags          = KVM_PGTABLE_WALK_LEAF,
+               .arg            = &data,
+       };
+
+       return kvm_pgtable_walk(pgt, addr, PAGE_SIZE, &__get_leaf_walker);
+}
+
 struct hyp_map_data {
        u64                             phys;
        kvm_pte_t                       attr;


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

  reply	other threads:[~2021-07-20 15:55 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 186+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-07-15 16:31 [PATCH 00/16] KVM: arm64: MMIO guard PV services Marc Zyngier
2021-07-15 16:31 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-15 16:31 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-15 16:31 ` [PATCH 01/16] KVM: arm64: Generalise VM features into a set of flags Marc Zyngier
2021-07-15 16:31   ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-15 16:31   ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-27 18:10   ` Will Deacon
2021-07-27 18:10     ` Will Deacon
2021-07-27 18:10     ` Will Deacon
2021-07-28  9:41     ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-28  9:41       ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-28  9:41       ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-28 14:51       ` Steven Price
2021-07-28 14:51         ` Steven Price
2021-07-28 14:51         ` Steven Price
2021-07-15 16:31 ` [PATCH 02/16] KVM: arm64: Don't issue CMOs when the physical address is invalid Marc Zyngier
2021-07-15 16:31   ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-15 16:31   ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-19 17:18   ` Quentin Perret
2021-07-19 17:18     ` Quentin Perret
2021-07-19 17:18     ` Quentin Perret
2021-07-20  8:04     ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-20  8:04       ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-20  8:04       ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-27 18:10   ` Will Deacon
2021-07-27 18:10     ` Will Deacon
2021-07-27 18:10     ` Will Deacon
2021-07-28  9:45     ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-28  9:45       ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-28  9:45       ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-15 16:31 ` [PATCH 03/16] KVM: arm64: Turn kvm_pgtable_stage2_set_owner into kvm_pgtable_stage2_annotate Marc Zyngier
2021-07-15 16:31   ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-15 16:31   ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-20 10:09   ` Quentin Perret
2021-07-20 10:09     ` Quentin Perret
2021-07-20 10:09     ` Quentin Perret
2021-07-20 10:21     ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-20 10:21       ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-20 10:21       ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-20 10:38       ` Quentin Perret
2021-07-20 10:38         ` Quentin Perret
2021-07-20 10:38         ` Quentin Perret
2021-07-20 11:20         ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-20 11:20           ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-20 11:20           ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-20 11:36           ` Quentin Perret
2021-07-20 11:36             ` Quentin Perret
2021-07-20 11:36             ` Quentin Perret
2021-07-20 13:13             ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-20 13:13               ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-20 13:13               ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-15 16:31 ` [PATCH 04/16] KVM: arm64: Add MMIO checking infrastructure Marc Zyngier
2021-07-15 16:31   ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-15 16:31   ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-20 11:13   ` Quentin Perret
2021-07-20 11:13     ` Quentin Perret
2021-07-20 11:13     ` Quentin Perret
2021-07-20 13:15     ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-20 13:15       ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-20 13:15       ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-20 15:49       ` Quentin Perret [this message]
2021-07-20 15:49         ` Quentin Perret
2021-07-20 15:49         ` Quentin Perret
2021-07-22 18:04         ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-22 18:04           ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-22 18:04           ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-23 10:16           ` Quentin Perret
2021-07-23 10:16             ` Quentin Perret
2021-07-23 10:16             ` Quentin Perret
2021-07-27 18:11   ` Will Deacon
2021-07-27 18:11     ` Will Deacon
2021-07-27 18:11     ` Will Deacon
2021-07-28  9:57     ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-28  9:57       ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-28  9:57       ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-30 12:26       ` Will Deacon
2021-07-30 12:26         ` Will Deacon
2021-07-30 12:26         ` Will Deacon
2021-07-30 13:04         ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-30 13:04           ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-30 13:04           ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-30 12:58     ` Quentin Perret
2021-07-30 12:58       ` Quentin Perret
2021-07-30 12:58       ` Quentin Perret
2021-07-15 16:31 ` [PATCH 05/16] KVM: arm64: Plumb MMIO checking into the fault handling Marc Zyngier
2021-07-15 16:31   ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-15 16:31   ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-27 18:11   ` Will Deacon
2021-07-27 18:11     ` Will Deacon
2021-07-27 18:11     ` Will Deacon
2021-07-28 10:21     ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-28 10:21       ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-28 10:21       ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-30 12:38       ` Will Deacon
2021-07-30 12:38         ` Will Deacon
2021-07-30 12:38         ` Will Deacon
2021-07-15 16:31 ` [PATCH 06/16] KVM: arm64: Force a full unmap on vpcu reinit Marc Zyngier
2021-07-15 16:31   ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-15 16:31   ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-27 18:11   ` Will Deacon
2021-07-27 18:11     ` Will Deacon
2021-07-27 18:11     ` Will Deacon
2021-07-28 10:38     ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-28 10:38       ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-28 10:38       ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-30 12:50       ` Will Deacon
2021-07-30 12:50         ` Will Deacon
2021-07-30 12:50         ` Will Deacon
2021-07-15 16:31 ` [PATCH 07/16] KVM: arm64: Wire MMIO guard hypercalls Marc Zyngier
2021-07-15 16:31   ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-15 16:31   ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-27 18:11   ` Will Deacon
2021-07-27 18:11     ` Will Deacon
2021-07-27 18:11     ` Will Deacon
2021-07-28 10:47     ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-28 10:47       ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-28 10:47       ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-30 13:11       ` Will Deacon
2021-07-30 13:11         ` Will Deacon
2021-07-30 13:11         ` Will Deacon
2021-08-01 11:20         ` Marc Zyngier
2021-08-01 11:20           ` Marc Zyngier
2021-08-01 11:20           ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-15 16:31 ` [PATCH 08/16] KVM: arm64: Add tracepoint for failed MMIO guard check Marc Zyngier
2021-07-15 16:31   ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-15 16:31   ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-15 16:31 ` [PATCH 09/16] KVM: arm64: Advertise a capability for MMIO guard Marc Zyngier
2021-07-15 16:31   ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-15 16:31   ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-15 16:31 ` [PATCH 10/16] KVM: arm64: Add some documentation for the MMIO guard feature Marc Zyngier
2021-07-15 16:31   ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-15 16:31   ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-21 21:17   ` Andrew Jones
2021-07-21 21:17     ` Andrew Jones
2021-07-21 21:17     ` Andrew Jones
2021-07-23 13:30     ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-23 13:30       ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-23 13:30       ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-23 13:38       ` Andrew Jones
2021-07-23 13:38         ` Andrew Jones
2021-07-23 13:38         ` Andrew Jones
2021-07-23 13:52         ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-23 13:52           ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-23 13:52           ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-15 16:31 ` [PATCH 11/16] firmware/smccc: Call arch-specific hook on discovering KVM services Marc Zyngier
2021-07-15 16:31   ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-15 16:31   ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-15 16:31 ` [PATCH 12/16] mm/ioremap: Add arch-specific callbacks on ioremap/iounmap calls Marc Zyngier
2021-07-15 16:31   ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-15 16:31   ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-27 18:12   ` Will Deacon
2021-07-27 18:12     ` Will Deacon
2021-07-27 18:12     ` Will Deacon
2021-07-28 11:01     ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-28 11:01       ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-28 11:01       ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-30 14:07       ` Will Deacon
2021-07-30 14:07         ` Will Deacon
2021-07-30 14:07         ` Will Deacon
2021-07-15 16:31 ` [PATCH 13/16] arm64: Implement ioremap/iounmap hooks calling into KVM's MMIO guard Marc Zyngier
2021-07-15 16:31   ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-15 16:31   ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-15 16:31 ` [PATCH 14/16] arm64: Enroll into KVM's MMIO guard if required Marc Zyngier
2021-07-15 16:31   ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-15 16:31   ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-15 16:31 ` [PATCH 15/16] arm64: Add a helper to retrieve the PTE of a fixmap Marc Zyngier
2021-07-15 16:31   ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-15 16:31   ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-20 11:16   ` Quentin Perret
2021-07-20 11:16     ` Quentin Perret
2021-07-20 11:16     ` Quentin Perret
2021-07-15 16:31 ` [PATCH 16/16] arm64: Register earlycon fixmap with the MMIO guard Marc Zyngier
2021-07-15 16:31   ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-15 16:31   ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-21 21:42 ` [PATCH 00/16] KVM: arm64: MMIO guard PV services Andrew Jones
2021-07-21 21:42   ` Andrew Jones
2021-07-21 21:42   ` Andrew Jones
2021-07-22 10:00   ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-22 10:00     ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-22 10:00     ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-22 13:25     ` Andrew Jones
2021-07-22 13:25       ` Andrew Jones
2021-07-22 13:25       ` Andrew Jones
2021-07-22 15:30       ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-22 15:30         ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-22 15:30         ` 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=YPbwmVk1YD9+y7tr@google.com \
    --to=qperret@google.com \
    --cc=alexandru.elisei@arm.com \
    --cc=dbrazdil@google.com \
    --cc=james.morse@arm.com \
    --cc=kernel-team@android.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=maz@kernel.org \
    --cc=sdonthineni@nvidia.com \
    --cc=suzuki.poulose@arm.com \
    --cc=vatsa@codeaurora.org \
    --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.