All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
To: Steven Price <steven.price@arm.com>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
	Julien Thierry <julien.thierry.kdev@gmail.com>,
	Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
	kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@arm.com>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Juan Quintela <quintela@redhat.com>,
	"Dr. David Alan Gilbert" <dgilbert@redhat.com>,
	Richard Henderson <richard.henderson@linaro.org>,
	Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>,
	Haibo Xu <Haibo.Xu@arm.com>, Andrew Jones <drjones@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 1/3] arm64: kvm: Save/restore MTE registers
Date: Thu, 04 Feb 2021 14:56:13 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <bf1fe1204a075abbd294435944973f62@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <e294d3d3-20d6-717d-4274-c190f9cc5887@arm.com>

On 2021-02-04 14:33, Steven Price wrote:
> On 02/02/2021 15:36, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>> On 2021-01-15 15:28, Steven Price wrote:
>>> Define the new system registers that MTE introduces and context 
>>> switch
>>> them. The MTE feature is still hidden from the ID register as it 
>>> isn't
>>> supported in a VM yet.
>>> 
>>> Signed-off-by: Steven Price <steven.price@arm.com>
>>> ---
>>>  arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h          |  4 ++
>>>  arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_mte.h           | 74 
>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>  arch/arm64/include/asm/sysreg.h            |  3 +-
>>>  arch/arm64/kernel/asm-offsets.c            |  3 +
>>>  arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/entry.S                 |  7 ++
>>>  arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/include/hyp/sysreg-sr.h |  4 ++
>>>  arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c                  | 14 ++--
>>>  7 files changed, 104 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>>  create mode 100644 arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_mte.h
>>> 
>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h
>>> b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h
>>> index 11beda85ee7e..51590a397e4b 100644
>>> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h
>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h
>>> @@ -148,6 +148,8 @@ enum vcpu_sysreg {
>>>      SCTLR_EL1,    /* System Control Register */
>>>      ACTLR_EL1,    /* Auxiliary Control Register */
>>>      CPACR_EL1,    /* Coprocessor Access Control */
>>> +    RGSR_EL1,    /* Random Allocation Tag Seed Register */
>>> +    GCR_EL1,    /* Tag Control Register */
>>>      ZCR_EL1,    /* SVE Control */
>>>      TTBR0_EL1,    /* Translation Table Base Register 0 */
>>>      TTBR1_EL1,    /* Translation Table Base Register 1 */
>>> @@ -164,6 +166,8 @@ enum vcpu_sysreg {
>>>      TPIDR_EL1,    /* Thread ID, Privileged */
>>>      AMAIR_EL1,    /* Aux Memory Attribute Indirection Register */
>>>      CNTKCTL_EL1,    /* Timer Control Register (EL1) */
>>> +    TFSRE0_EL1,    /* Tag Fault Status Register (EL0) */
>>> +    TFSR_EL1,    /* Tag Fault Stauts Register (EL1) */
>> 
>> s/Stauts/Status/
>> 
>> Is there any reason why the MTE registers aren't grouped together?
> 
> I has been under the impression this list is sorted by the encoding of
> the system registers, although double checking I've screwed up the
> order of TFSRE0_EL1/TFSR_EL1, and not all the other fields are sorted
> that way.

It grew organically, and was initially matching the original order
of the save/restore sequence. This order has long disappeared with
VHE, and this is essentially nothing more than a bag of indices
(although NV does bring some order back to deal with VNCR-backed
registers).

[...]

>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/include/hyp/sysreg-sr.h
>>> b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/include/hyp/sysreg-sr.h
>>> index cce43bfe158f..94d9736f0133 100644
>>> --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/include/hyp/sysreg-sr.h
>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/include/hyp/sysreg-sr.h
>>> @@ -45,6 +45,8 @@ static inline void __sysreg_save_el1_state(struct
>>> kvm_cpu_context *ctxt)
>>>      ctxt_sys_reg(ctxt, CNTKCTL_EL1)    = 
>>> read_sysreg_el1(SYS_CNTKCTL);
>>>      ctxt_sys_reg(ctxt, PAR_EL1)    = read_sysreg_par();
>>>      ctxt_sys_reg(ctxt, TPIDR_EL1)    = read_sysreg(tpidr_el1);
>>> +    if (system_supports_mte())
>>> +        ctxt_sys_reg(ctxt, TFSR_EL1) = read_sysreg_el1(SYS_TFSR);
>> 
>> I already asked for it, and I'm going to ask for it again:
>> Most of the sysreg save/restore is guarded by a per-vcpu check
>> (HCR_EL2.ATA), while this one is unconditionally saved/restore
>> if the host is MTE capable. Why is that so?
> 
> Sorry, I thought your concern was for registers that affect the host
> (as they are obviously more performance critical as they are hit on
> every guest exit). Although I guess that's incorrect for nVHE which is
> what all the cool kids want now ;)

I think we want both correctness *and* performance, for both VHE
and nVHE. Things like EL0 registers should be able to be moved
to load/put on all implementations, and the correct switching
be done at the right spot only when required.

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: Steven Price <steven.price@arm.com>
Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
	Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>,
	"Dr. David Alan Gilbert" <dgilbert@redhat.com>,
	Andrew Jones <drjones@redhat.com>, Haibo Xu <Haibo.Xu@arm.com>,
	Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
	qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	Juan Quintela <quintela@redhat.com>,
	Richard Henderson <richard.henderson@linaro.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@arm.com>,
	James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
	kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu,
	Julien Thierry <julien.thierry.kdev@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 1/3] arm64: kvm: Save/restore MTE registers
Date: Thu, 04 Feb 2021 14:56:13 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <bf1fe1204a075abbd294435944973f62@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <e294d3d3-20d6-717d-4274-c190f9cc5887@arm.com>

On 2021-02-04 14:33, Steven Price wrote:
> On 02/02/2021 15:36, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>> On 2021-01-15 15:28, Steven Price wrote:
>>> Define the new system registers that MTE introduces and context 
>>> switch
>>> them. The MTE feature is still hidden from the ID register as it 
>>> isn't
>>> supported in a VM yet.
>>> 
>>> Signed-off-by: Steven Price <steven.price@arm.com>
>>> ---
>>>  arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h          |  4 ++
>>>  arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_mte.h           | 74 
>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>  arch/arm64/include/asm/sysreg.h            |  3 +-
>>>  arch/arm64/kernel/asm-offsets.c            |  3 +
>>>  arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/entry.S                 |  7 ++
>>>  arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/include/hyp/sysreg-sr.h |  4 ++
>>>  arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c                  | 14 ++--
>>>  7 files changed, 104 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>>  create mode 100644 arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_mte.h
>>> 
>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h
>>> b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h
>>> index 11beda85ee7e..51590a397e4b 100644
>>> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h
>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h
>>> @@ -148,6 +148,8 @@ enum vcpu_sysreg {
>>>      SCTLR_EL1,    /* System Control Register */
>>>      ACTLR_EL1,    /* Auxiliary Control Register */
>>>      CPACR_EL1,    /* Coprocessor Access Control */
>>> +    RGSR_EL1,    /* Random Allocation Tag Seed Register */
>>> +    GCR_EL1,    /* Tag Control Register */
>>>      ZCR_EL1,    /* SVE Control */
>>>      TTBR0_EL1,    /* Translation Table Base Register 0 */
>>>      TTBR1_EL1,    /* Translation Table Base Register 1 */
>>> @@ -164,6 +166,8 @@ enum vcpu_sysreg {
>>>      TPIDR_EL1,    /* Thread ID, Privileged */
>>>      AMAIR_EL1,    /* Aux Memory Attribute Indirection Register */
>>>      CNTKCTL_EL1,    /* Timer Control Register (EL1) */
>>> +    TFSRE0_EL1,    /* Tag Fault Status Register (EL0) */
>>> +    TFSR_EL1,    /* Tag Fault Stauts Register (EL1) */
>> 
>> s/Stauts/Status/
>> 
>> Is there any reason why the MTE registers aren't grouped together?
> 
> I has been under the impression this list is sorted by the encoding of
> the system registers, although double checking I've screwed up the
> order of TFSRE0_EL1/TFSR_EL1, and not all the other fields are sorted
> that way.

It grew organically, and was initially matching the original order
of the save/restore sequence. This order has long disappeared with
VHE, and this is essentially nothing more than a bag of indices
(although NV does bring some order back to deal with VNCR-backed
registers).

[...]

>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/include/hyp/sysreg-sr.h
>>> b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/include/hyp/sysreg-sr.h
>>> index cce43bfe158f..94d9736f0133 100644
>>> --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/include/hyp/sysreg-sr.h
>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/include/hyp/sysreg-sr.h
>>> @@ -45,6 +45,8 @@ static inline void __sysreg_save_el1_state(struct
>>> kvm_cpu_context *ctxt)
>>>      ctxt_sys_reg(ctxt, CNTKCTL_EL1)    = 
>>> read_sysreg_el1(SYS_CNTKCTL);
>>>      ctxt_sys_reg(ctxt, PAR_EL1)    = read_sysreg_par();
>>>      ctxt_sys_reg(ctxt, TPIDR_EL1)    = read_sysreg(tpidr_el1);
>>> +    if (system_supports_mte())
>>> +        ctxt_sys_reg(ctxt, TFSR_EL1) = read_sysreg_el1(SYS_TFSR);
>> 
>> I already asked for it, and I'm going to ask for it again:
>> Most of the sysreg save/restore is guarded by a per-vcpu check
>> (HCR_EL2.ATA), while this one is unconditionally saved/restore
>> if the host is MTE capable. Why is that so?
> 
> Sorry, I thought your concern was for registers that affect the host
> (as they are obviously more performance critical as they are hit on
> every guest exit). Although I guess that's incorrect for nVHE which is
> what all the cool kids want now ;)

I think we want both correctness *and* performance, for both VHE
and nVHE. Things like EL0 registers should be able to be moved
to load/put on all implementations, and the correct switching
be done at the right spot only when required.

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: Steven Price <steven.price@arm.com>
Cc: "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" <dgilbert@redhat.com>,
	qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	Juan Quintela <quintela@redhat.com>,
	Richard Henderson <richard.henderson@linaro.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@arm.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
	kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 1/3] arm64: kvm: Save/restore MTE registers
Date: Thu, 04 Feb 2021 14:56:13 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <bf1fe1204a075abbd294435944973f62@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <e294d3d3-20d6-717d-4274-c190f9cc5887@arm.com>

On 2021-02-04 14:33, Steven Price wrote:
> On 02/02/2021 15:36, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>> On 2021-01-15 15:28, Steven Price wrote:
>>> Define the new system registers that MTE introduces and context 
>>> switch
>>> them. The MTE feature is still hidden from the ID register as it 
>>> isn't
>>> supported in a VM yet.
>>> 
>>> Signed-off-by: Steven Price <steven.price@arm.com>
>>> ---
>>>  arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h          |  4 ++
>>>  arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_mte.h           | 74 
>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>  arch/arm64/include/asm/sysreg.h            |  3 +-
>>>  arch/arm64/kernel/asm-offsets.c            |  3 +
>>>  arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/entry.S                 |  7 ++
>>>  arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/include/hyp/sysreg-sr.h |  4 ++
>>>  arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c                  | 14 ++--
>>>  7 files changed, 104 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>>  create mode 100644 arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_mte.h
>>> 
>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h
>>> b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h
>>> index 11beda85ee7e..51590a397e4b 100644
>>> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h
>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h
>>> @@ -148,6 +148,8 @@ enum vcpu_sysreg {
>>>      SCTLR_EL1,    /* System Control Register */
>>>      ACTLR_EL1,    /* Auxiliary Control Register */
>>>      CPACR_EL1,    /* Coprocessor Access Control */
>>> +    RGSR_EL1,    /* Random Allocation Tag Seed Register */
>>> +    GCR_EL1,    /* Tag Control Register */
>>>      ZCR_EL1,    /* SVE Control */
>>>      TTBR0_EL1,    /* Translation Table Base Register 0 */
>>>      TTBR1_EL1,    /* Translation Table Base Register 1 */
>>> @@ -164,6 +166,8 @@ enum vcpu_sysreg {
>>>      TPIDR_EL1,    /* Thread ID, Privileged */
>>>      AMAIR_EL1,    /* Aux Memory Attribute Indirection Register */
>>>      CNTKCTL_EL1,    /* Timer Control Register (EL1) */
>>> +    TFSRE0_EL1,    /* Tag Fault Status Register (EL0) */
>>> +    TFSR_EL1,    /* Tag Fault Stauts Register (EL1) */
>> 
>> s/Stauts/Status/
>> 
>> Is there any reason why the MTE registers aren't grouped together?
> 
> I has been under the impression this list is sorted by the encoding of
> the system registers, although double checking I've screwed up the
> order of TFSRE0_EL1/TFSR_EL1, and not all the other fields are sorted
> that way.

It grew organically, and was initially matching the original order
of the save/restore sequence. This order has long disappeared with
VHE, and this is essentially nothing more than a bag of indices
(although NV does bring some order back to deal with VNCR-backed
registers).

[...]

>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/include/hyp/sysreg-sr.h
>>> b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/include/hyp/sysreg-sr.h
>>> index cce43bfe158f..94d9736f0133 100644
>>> --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/include/hyp/sysreg-sr.h
>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/include/hyp/sysreg-sr.h
>>> @@ -45,6 +45,8 @@ static inline void __sysreg_save_el1_state(struct
>>> kvm_cpu_context *ctxt)
>>>      ctxt_sys_reg(ctxt, CNTKCTL_EL1)    = 
>>> read_sysreg_el1(SYS_CNTKCTL);
>>>      ctxt_sys_reg(ctxt, PAR_EL1)    = read_sysreg_par();
>>>      ctxt_sys_reg(ctxt, TPIDR_EL1)    = read_sysreg(tpidr_el1);
>>> +    if (system_supports_mte())
>>> +        ctxt_sys_reg(ctxt, TFSR_EL1) = read_sysreg_el1(SYS_TFSR);
>> 
>> I already asked for it, and I'm going to ask for it again:
>> Most of the sysreg save/restore is guarded by a per-vcpu check
>> (HCR_EL2.ATA), while this one is unconditionally saved/restore
>> if the host is MTE capable. Why is that so?
> 
> Sorry, I thought your concern was for registers that affect the host
> (as they are obviously more performance critical as they are hit on
> every guest exit). Although I guess that's incorrect for nVHE which is
> what all the cool kids want now ;)

I think we want both correctness *and* performance, for both VHE
and nVHE. Things like EL0 registers should be able to be moved
to load/put on all implementations, and the correct switching
be done at the right spot only when required.

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: Steven Price <steven.price@arm.com>
Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
	Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>,
	"Dr. David Alan Gilbert" <dgilbert@redhat.com>,
	Andrew Jones <drjones@redhat.com>, Haibo Xu <Haibo.Xu@arm.com>,
	Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
	qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	Juan Quintela <quintela@redhat.com>,
	Richard Henderson <richard.henderson@linaro.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@arm.com>,
	James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
	kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu,
	Julien Thierry <julien.thierry.kdev@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 1/3] arm64: kvm: Save/restore MTE registers
Date: Thu, 04 Feb 2021 14:56:13 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <bf1fe1204a075abbd294435944973f62@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <e294d3d3-20d6-717d-4274-c190f9cc5887@arm.com>

On 2021-02-04 14:33, Steven Price wrote:
> On 02/02/2021 15:36, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>> On 2021-01-15 15:28, Steven Price wrote:
>>> Define the new system registers that MTE introduces and context 
>>> switch
>>> them. The MTE feature is still hidden from the ID register as it 
>>> isn't
>>> supported in a VM yet.
>>> 
>>> Signed-off-by: Steven Price <steven.price@arm.com>
>>> ---
>>>  arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h          |  4 ++
>>>  arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_mte.h           | 74 
>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>  arch/arm64/include/asm/sysreg.h            |  3 +-
>>>  arch/arm64/kernel/asm-offsets.c            |  3 +
>>>  arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/entry.S                 |  7 ++
>>>  arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/include/hyp/sysreg-sr.h |  4 ++
>>>  arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c                  | 14 ++--
>>>  7 files changed, 104 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>>  create mode 100644 arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_mte.h
>>> 
>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h
>>> b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h
>>> index 11beda85ee7e..51590a397e4b 100644
>>> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h
>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h
>>> @@ -148,6 +148,8 @@ enum vcpu_sysreg {
>>>      SCTLR_EL1,    /* System Control Register */
>>>      ACTLR_EL1,    /* Auxiliary Control Register */
>>>      CPACR_EL1,    /* Coprocessor Access Control */
>>> +    RGSR_EL1,    /* Random Allocation Tag Seed Register */
>>> +    GCR_EL1,    /* Tag Control Register */
>>>      ZCR_EL1,    /* SVE Control */
>>>      TTBR0_EL1,    /* Translation Table Base Register 0 */
>>>      TTBR1_EL1,    /* Translation Table Base Register 1 */
>>> @@ -164,6 +166,8 @@ enum vcpu_sysreg {
>>>      TPIDR_EL1,    /* Thread ID, Privileged */
>>>      AMAIR_EL1,    /* Aux Memory Attribute Indirection Register */
>>>      CNTKCTL_EL1,    /* Timer Control Register (EL1) */
>>> +    TFSRE0_EL1,    /* Tag Fault Status Register (EL0) */
>>> +    TFSR_EL1,    /* Tag Fault Stauts Register (EL1) */
>> 
>> s/Stauts/Status/
>> 
>> Is there any reason why the MTE registers aren't grouped together?
> 
> I has been under the impression this list is sorted by the encoding of
> the system registers, although double checking I've screwed up the
> order of TFSRE0_EL1/TFSR_EL1, and not all the other fields are sorted
> that way.

It grew organically, and was initially matching the original order
of the save/restore sequence. This order has long disappeared with
VHE, and this is essentially nothing more than a bag of indices
(although NV does bring some order back to deal with VNCR-backed
registers).

[...]

>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/include/hyp/sysreg-sr.h
>>> b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/include/hyp/sysreg-sr.h
>>> index cce43bfe158f..94d9736f0133 100644
>>> --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/include/hyp/sysreg-sr.h
>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/include/hyp/sysreg-sr.h
>>> @@ -45,6 +45,8 @@ static inline void __sysreg_save_el1_state(struct
>>> kvm_cpu_context *ctxt)
>>>      ctxt_sys_reg(ctxt, CNTKCTL_EL1)    = 
>>> read_sysreg_el1(SYS_CNTKCTL);
>>>      ctxt_sys_reg(ctxt, PAR_EL1)    = read_sysreg_par();
>>>      ctxt_sys_reg(ctxt, TPIDR_EL1)    = read_sysreg(tpidr_el1);
>>> +    if (system_supports_mte())
>>> +        ctxt_sys_reg(ctxt, TFSR_EL1) = read_sysreg_el1(SYS_TFSR);
>> 
>> I already asked for it, and I'm going to ask for it again:
>> Most of the sysreg save/restore is guarded by a per-vcpu check
>> (HCR_EL2.ATA), while this one is unconditionally saved/restore
>> if the host is MTE capable. Why is that so?
> 
> Sorry, I thought your concern was for registers that affect the host
> (as they are obviously more performance critical as they are hit on
> every guest exit). Although I guess that's incorrect for nVHE which is
> what all the cool kids want now ;)

I think we want both correctness *and* performance, for both VHE
and nVHE. Things like EL0 registers should be able to be moved
to load/put on all implementations, and the correct switching
be done at the right spot only when required.

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

  reply	other threads:[~2021-02-04 14:59 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-01-15 15:28 [PATCH v7 0/3] MTE support for KVM guest Steven Price
2021-01-15 15:28 ` Steven Price
2021-01-15 15:28 ` Steven Price
2021-01-15 15:28 ` Steven Price
2021-01-15 15:28 ` [PATCH v7 1/3] arm64: kvm: Save/restore MTE registers Steven Price
2021-01-15 15:28   ` Steven Price
2021-01-15 15:28   ` Steven Price
2021-01-15 15:28   ` Steven Price
2021-02-02 15:36   ` Marc Zyngier
2021-02-02 15:36     ` Marc Zyngier
2021-02-02 15:36     ` Marc Zyngier
2021-02-02 15:36     ` Marc Zyngier
2021-02-04 14:33     ` Steven Price
2021-02-04 14:33       ` Steven Price
2021-02-04 14:33       ` Steven Price
2021-02-04 14:33       ` Steven Price
2021-02-04 14:56       ` Marc Zyngier [this message]
2021-02-04 14:56         ` Marc Zyngier
2021-02-04 14:56         ` Marc Zyngier
2021-02-04 14:56         ` Marc Zyngier
2021-01-15 15:28 ` [PATCH v7 2/3] arm64: kvm: Introduce MTE VCPU feature Steven Price
2021-01-15 15:28   ` Steven Price
2021-01-15 15:28   ` Steven Price
2021-01-15 15:28   ` Steven Price
2021-02-02 17:12   ` Marc Zyngier
2021-02-02 17:12     ` Marc Zyngier
2021-02-02 17:12     ` Marc Zyngier
2021-02-02 17:12     ` Marc Zyngier
2021-02-04 14:33     ` Steven Price
2021-02-04 14:33       ` Steven Price
2021-02-04 14:33       ` Steven Price
2021-02-04 14:33       ` Steven Price
2021-01-15 15:28 ` [RFC PATCH v7 3/3] KVM: arm64: ioctl to fetch/store tags in a guest Steven Price
2021-01-15 15:28   ` Steven Price
2021-01-15 15:28   ` Steven Price
2021-01-15 15:28   ` Steven Price
2021-01-15 18:33   ` kernel test robot

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=bf1fe1204a075abbd294435944973f62@kernel.org \
    --to=maz@kernel.org \
    --cc=Dave.Martin@arm.com \
    --cc=Haibo.Xu@arm.com \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=dgilbert@redhat.com \
    --cc=drjones@redhat.com \
    --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=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
    --cc=peter.maydell@linaro.org \
    --cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
    --cc=quintela@redhat.com \
    --cc=richard.henderson@linaro.org \
    --cc=steven.price@arm.com \
    --cc=suzuki.poulose@arm.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --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.