From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A541C433FE for ; Tue, 18 Oct 2022 16:45:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229648AbiJRQpe (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Oct 2022 12:45:34 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:54006 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229732AbiJRQpc (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Oct 2022 12:45:32 -0400 Received: from mail-ed1-x52f.google.com (mail-ed1-x52f.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::52f]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B4FF69D50D for ; Tue, 18 Oct 2022 09:45:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ed1-x52f.google.com with SMTP id r14so21368118edc.7 for ; Tue, 18 Oct 2022 09:45:31 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20210112; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=OCJsHqR3fQYSgnggViyn3fMnrEwEtr4DogQg4RXYXfU=; b=OTRdidlgd4M+FwW6O5/QmVZjVoFUteHzrGjxAXNpavm6P0/bJ2oKKpVtri2Z7qkcWS 5JWQYnY7afyOrgZhzZHFjmw9efVV2gjkQeFaMP+fmwcjwuS82qAivOdVz5DIm0te1MzR Pwchuxk3ooNK3QdvuAjNh9l1YqcgHyan06709W1zjjCD+KSz3zjOVbT3bqFpQ2yp4hIC qbJxL5Oy7NcTMET5jxqyahqZNxTVKcYbOiWxUa0zcvNgixzWyb14gNlz2O+9P7yC8xtY EREtg4jooDmz6U6w/mtou9+3RUms1DMcQaOFJyWn+75HCVGcEWNWxCPIirthBvftBJoq VGaw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=OCJsHqR3fQYSgnggViyn3fMnrEwEtr4DogQg4RXYXfU=; b=SHwGylS6ccopqPUl0byc67SSXoYqOEywNIzymTzSv4M+8rzBhLkm2vFLnJ1p/Zhlls mjgb18f4B9L798/w+E0lGhz8X0nZHAdYnjvPXkQbLsd3lkoSe/ic1AoJ8mgMjRF+E1L3 8ebaRj7a44pDGSoXGfTlKKgGaA3q5nIiTtZtcbmIA95TXM06eX2RhQCzG0IRp+sDmLeY uNk4E0SxK3GBZ2VXU5IxpsPaAEDn4Nwbe+CKllIUR1rj3c2Cv5ibP4S3aTHuT1UxfyQp 0YyX2A0UeOE0PtkI1H6qk7ZbnKu+gtsfVfmXPZmkEQ+8FsdPkyf3IWhIAhQXvNP56Tq/ 3EcA== X-Gm-Message-State: ACrzQf33mKx7yBmdCzP5Z7jXsheHAgdL8lN5cHBDor+11QIHu1zaX4/7 bcnxniyE4+d3B3EjoWp1Z0pMAA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AMsMyM6I0P0S9DziDRNVM+YYRXKEEihJKzfSjWKlLw6I00yhLT/182go6gfMS7BANtRyQPharE/Otw== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6402:909:b0:435:a8b:5232 with SMTP id g9-20020a056402090900b004350a8b5232mr3457453edz.240.1666111529948; Tue, 18 Oct 2022 09:45:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from google.com (64.227.90.34.bc.googleusercontent.com. [34.90.227.64]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id hx15-20020a170906846f00b0074134543f82sm7856285ejc.90.2022.10.18.09.45.29 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 18 Oct 2022 09:45:29 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2022 16:45:26 +0000 From: Quentin Perret To: Will Deacon Cc: kvmarm@lists.linux.dev, Sean Christopherson , Vincent Donnefort , Alexandru Elisei , Catalin Marinas , James Morse , Chao Peng , Suzuki K Poulose , Mark Rutland , Fuad Tabba , Oliver Upton , Marc Zyngier , kernel-team@android.com, kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 12/25] KVM: arm64: Add infrastructure to create and track pKVM instances at EL2 Message-ID: References: <20221017115209.2099-1-will@kernel.org> <20221017115209.2099-13-will@kernel.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20221017115209.2099-13-will@kernel.org> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: kvm@vger.kernel.org On Monday 17 Oct 2022 at 12:51:56 (+0100), Will Deacon wrote: > +static int find_free_vm_table_entry(struct kvm *host_kvm) > +{ > + int i, ret = -ENOMEM; > + > + for (i = 0; i < KVM_MAX_PVMS; ++i) { > + struct pkvm_hyp_vm *vm = vm_table[i]; > + > + if (!vm) { > + if (ret < 0) > + ret = i; > + continue; > + } > + > + if (unlikely(vm->host_kvm == host_kvm)) { > + ret = -EEXIST; > + break; > + } That would be funny if the host passed the same struct twice, but do we care? If the host wants to shoot itself in the foot, it's not our problem I guess :) ? Also, we don't do the same check for vCPUs so ...