From: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com>
To: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
Cc: 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, tabba@google.com,
dbrazdil@google.com, kernel-team@android.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 08/14] KVM: arm64: Add support for tagging shared pages in page-table
Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2021 16:49:13 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YPWe+W3QmeYHqre/@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87fswajre1.wl-maz@kernel.org>
On Monday 19 Jul 2021 at 15:43:34 (+0100), Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Jul 2021 11:47:29 +0100,
> Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com> wrote:
> >
> > The hypervisor will soon be in charge of tracking ownership of all
> > memory pages in the system. The current page-tracking infrastructure at
> > EL2 only allows binary states: a page is either owned or not by an
> > entity. But a number of use-cases will require more complex states for
> > pages that are shared between two entities (host, hypervisor, or guests).
> >
> > In preparation for supporting these use-cases, introduce in the KVM
> > page-table library some infrastructure allowing to tag shared pages
> > using ignored bits (a.k.a. software bits) in PTEs.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com>
> > ---
> > arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_pgtable.h | 5 +++++
> > arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/pgtable.c | 25 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > 2 files changed, 30 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_pgtable.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_pgtable.h
> > index dd72653314c7..f6d3d5c8910d 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_pgtable.h
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_pgtable.h
> > @@ -81,6 +81,8 @@ enum kvm_pgtable_stage2_flags {
> > * @KVM_PGTABLE_PROT_W: Write permission.
> > * @KVM_PGTABLE_PROT_R: Read permission.
> > * @KVM_PGTABLE_PROT_DEVICE: Device attributes.
> > + * @KVM_PGTABLE_STATE_SHARED: Page shared with another entity.
> > + * @KVM_PGTABLE_STATE_BORROWED: Page borrowed from another entity.
> > */
> > enum kvm_pgtable_prot {
> > KVM_PGTABLE_PROT_X = BIT(0),
> > @@ -88,6 +90,9 @@ enum kvm_pgtable_prot {
> > KVM_PGTABLE_PROT_R = BIT(2),
> >
> > KVM_PGTABLE_PROT_DEVICE = BIT(3),
> > +
> > + KVM_PGTABLE_STATE_SHARED = BIT(4),
> > + KVM_PGTABLE_STATE_BORROWED = BIT(5),
>
> I'd rather have some indirection here, as we have other potential
> users for the SW bits outside of pKVM (see the NV series, which uses
> some of these SW bits as the backend for TTL-based TLB invalidation).
>
> Can we instead only describe the SW bit states in this enum, and let
> the users map the semantic they require onto that state? See [1] for
> what I carry in the NV branch.
Works for me -- I just wanted to make sure we don't have users in
different places that use the same bits without knowing, but no strong
opinions, so happy to change.
> > };
> >
> > #define KVM_PGTABLE_PROT_RW (KVM_PGTABLE_PROT_R | KVM_PGTABLE_PROT_W)
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/pgtable.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/pgtable.c
> > index 5bdbe7a31551..51598b79dafc 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/pgtable.c
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/pgtable.c
> > @@ -211,6 +211,29 @@ static kvm_pte_t kvm_init_invalid_leaf_owner(u8 owner_id)
> > return FIELD_PREP(KVM_INVALID_PTE_OWNER_MASK, owner_id);
> > }
> >
> > +static kvm_pte_t pte_ignored_bit_prot(enum kvm_pgtable_prot prot)
>
> Can we call these sw rather than ignored?
Sure.
> > +{
> > + kvm_pte_t ignored_bits = 0;
> > +
> > + /*
> > + * Ignored bits 0 and 1 are reserved to track the memory ownership
> > + * state of each page:
> > + * 00: The page is owned solely by the page-table owner.
> > + * 01: The page is owned by the page-table owner, but is shared
> > + * with another entity.
> > + * 10: The page is shared with, but not owned by the page-table owner.
> > + * 11: Reserved for future use (lending).
> > + */
> > + if (prot & KVM_PGTABLE_STATE_SHARED) {
> > + if (prot & KVM_PGTABLE_STATE_BORROWED)
> > + ignored_bits |= BIT(1);
> > + else
> > + ignored_bits |= BIT(0);
> > + }
> > +
> > + return FIELD_PREP(KVM_PTE_LEAF_ATTR_IGNORED, ignored_bits);
> > +}
> > +
> > static int kvm_pgtable_visitor_cb(struct kvm_pgtable_walk_data *data, u64 addr,
> > u32 level, kvm_pte_t *ptep,
> > enum kvm_pgtable_walk_flags flag)
> > @@ -357,6 +380,7 @@ static int hyp_set_prot_attr(enum kvm_pgtable_prot prot, kvm_pte_t *ptep)
> > attr |= FIELD_PREP(KVM_PTE_LEAF_ATTR_LO_S1_AP, ap);
> > attr |= FIELD_PREP(KVM_PTE_LEAF_ATTR_LO_S1_SH, sh);
> > attr |= KVM_PTE_LEAF_ATTR_LO_S1_AF;
> > + attr |= pte_ignored_bit_prot(prot);
> > *ptep = attr;
> >
> > return 0;
> > @@ -558,6 +582,7 @@ static int stage2_set_prot_attr(struct kvm_pgtable *pgt, enum kvm_pgtable_prot p
> >
> > attr |= FIELD_PREP(KVM_PTE_LEAF_ATTR_LO_S2_SH, sh);
> > attr |= KVM_PTE_LEAF_ATTR_LO_S2_AF;
> > + attr |= pte_ignored_bit_prot(prot);
> > *ptep = attr;
> >
> > return 0;
>
> How about kvm_pgtable_stage2_relax_perms()?
It should leave SW bits untouched, and it really felt like a path were
we want to change permissions and nothing else. What did you have in
mind?
Cheers,
Quentin
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-07-19 17:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 42+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-07-19 10:47 [PATCH 00/14] Track shared pages at EL2 in protected mode Quentin Perret
2021-07-19 10:47 ` [PATCH 01/14] KVM: arm64: Provide the host_stage2_try() helper macro Quentin Perret
2021-07-20 13:57 ` Fuad Tabba
2021-07-19 10:47 ` [PATCH 02/14] KVM: arm64: Optimize kvm_pgtable_stage2_find_range() Quentin Perret
2021-07-19 10:47 ` [PATCH 03/14] KVM: arm64: Continue stage-2 map when re-creating mappings Quentin Perret
2021-07-19 12:14 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-19 13:32 ` Quentin Perret
2021-07-20 8:26 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-20 11:56 ` Quentin Perret
2021-07-19 10:47 ` [PATCH 04/14] KVM: arm64: Rename KVM_PTE_LEAF_ATTR_S2_IGNORED Quentin Perret
2021-07-19 10:47 ` [PATCH 05/14] KVM: arm64: Don't overwrite ignored bits with owner id Quentin Perret
2021-07-19 12:55 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-19 13:39 ` Quentin Perret
2021-07-20 8:46 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-19 10:47 ` [PATCH 06/14] KVM: arm64: Tolerate re-creating hyp mappings to set ignored bits Quentin Perret
2021-07-20 10:17 ` Fuad Tabba
2021-07-20 10:30 ` Quentin Perret
2021-07-20 10:59 ` Fuad Tabba
2021-07-20 11:14 ` Quentin Perret
2021-07-19 10:47 ` [PATCH 07/14] KVM: arm64: Enable forcing page-level stage-2 mappings Quentin Perret
2021-07-19 14:24 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-19 15:36 ` Quentin Perret
2021-07-19 10:47 ` [PATCH 08/14] KVM: arm64: Add support for tagging shared pages in page-table Quentin Perret
2021-07-19 14:43 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-19 15:49 ` Quentin Perret [this message]
2021-07-20 10:13 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-20 11:48 ` Quentin Perret
2021-07-20 13:48 ` Fuad Tabba
2021-07-20 14:06 ` Quentin Perret
2021-07-21 7:34 ` Fuad Tabba
2021-07-19 10:47 ` [PATCH 09/14] KVM: arm64: Mark host bss and rodata section as shared Quentin Perret
2021-07-19 15:01 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-07-19 15:56 ` Quentin Perret
2021-07-19 10:47 ` [PATCH 10/14] KVM: arm64: Enable retrieving protections attributes of PTEs Quentin Perret
2021-07-19 10:47 ` [PATCH 11/14] KVM: arm64: Expose kvm_pte_valid() helper Quentin Perret
2021-07-21 8:20 ` Fuad Tabba
2021-07-19 10:47 ` [PATCH 12/14] KVM: arm64: Refactor pkvm_pgtable locking Quentin Perret
2021-07-21 8:37 ` Fuad Tabba
2021-07-19 10:47 ` [PATCH 13/14] KVM: arm64: Restrict hyp stage-1 manipulation in protected mode Quentin Perret
2021-07-21 10:45 ` Fuad Tabba
2021-07-21 13:35 ` Quentin Perret
2021-07-19 10:47 ` [PATCH 14/14] KVM: arm64: Prevent late calls to __pkvm_create_private_mapping() 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=YPWe+W3QmeYHqre/@google.com \
--to=qperret@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=qwandor@google.com \
--cc=suzuki.poulose@arm.com \
--cc=tabba@google.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).