From: Andrew Jones <drjones@redhat.com>
To: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>
Cc: qemu-arm <qemu-arm@nongnu.org>,
QEMU Developers <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>,
Beata Michalska <beata.michalska@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] hw/arm/virt: Implement kvm-steal-time
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2020 16:40:50 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200729144050.pzl4t3pnpt2zg36u@kamzik.brq.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAFEAcA_GGVyjV_avxAfrRKnF72mxXEEf=J34aq-L8yMnLndigg@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, Jul 21, 2020 at 11:46:12AM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
> > + if (!probed) {
> > + probed = true;
> > + if (kvm_check_extension(kvm_state, KVM_CAP_VCPU_ATTRIBUTES)) {
> > + if (!kvm_arm_create_scratch_host_vcpu(NULL, fdarray, NULL)) {
> > + error_report("Failed to create scratch VCPU");
> > + abort();
> > + }
> > +
> > + has_steal_time = kvm_device_check_attr(fdarray[2],
> > + KVM_ARM_VCPU_PVTIME_CTRL,
> > + KVM_ARM_VCPU_PVTIME_IPA);
> > +
> > + kvm_arm_destroy_scratch_host_vcpu(fdarray);
>
> I was a bit surprised that we create a scratch VCPU here, but
> it looks like we've opted for "create scratch VCPU, check specific
> detail, destroy VCPU" as the usual coding pattern rather than trying
> to coalesce into a single "create scratch VCPU once, cache all
> the info we might need for later". I guess if somebody (a) cares
> about startup performance and (b) finds through profiling that
> creation-and-destruction of the scratch VMs/VCPUs is a significant
> contributor they can write the refactoring themselves :-)
There's still a chance I'll be changing this to a KVM CAP if the KVM
maintainers accept the patch I proposed to add one.
>
> > + }
> > + }
> > +
> > + if (cpu->kvm_steal_time == ON_OFF_AUTO_AUTO) {
> > + if (!has_steal_time || !arm_feature(&cpu->env, ARM_FEATURE_AARCH64)) {
> > + cpu->kvm_steal_time = ON_OFF_AUTO_OFF;
> > + } else {
> > + cpu->kvm_steal_time = ON_OFF_AUTO_ON;
> > + }
> > + } else if (cpu->kvm_steal_time == ON_OFF_AUTO_ON) {
> > + if (!has_steal_time) {
> > + error_setg(errp, "'kvm-steal-time' cannot be enabled "
> > + "on this host");
> > + return;
> > + } else if (!arm_feature(&cpu->env, ARM_FEATURE_AARCH64)) {
> > + error_setg(errp, "'kvm-steal-time' cannot be enabled "
> > + "for AArch32 guests");
>
> Why not? Unlike aarch32-host KVM, aarch32-guest KVM is
> still supported. What's the missing piece for kvm-steal-time
> to work in that setup?
The specification. DEN0057A chapter 2 says "This specification only covers
systems in which the Execution state of the hypervisor as well as EL1 of
virtual machines is AArch64.". And, to ensure that the smc/hvc calls are
only specified as smc64/hvc64. I find that a bit disappointing, since
there's nothing about steal-time that should be 64-bit specific, but
that's how this cookie is crumbling...
I'll add a comment to explain this error for v2.
>
> > + return;
> > + }
> > + }
> > +}
> > +
> > bool kvm_arm_aarch32_supported(void)
> > {
> > return kvm_check_extension(kvm_state, KVM_CAP_ARM_EL1_32BIT);
>
> > static inline void kvm_arm_add_vcpu_properties(Object *obj) {}
> > +static inline void kvm_arm_steal_time_finalize(ARMCPU *cpu, Error **errp) {}
>
> Does this stub need to report an error to the caller via errp,
> or is it a "never called but needs to exist to avoid linker errors" ?
The second one, as we can't have kvm_enabled() and !defined(CONFIG_KVM).
Hmm, these types of stubs would be more robust to refactoring if we put
build bugs in them. I can try to analyze all the stubs in this #else to
see which ones should be returning false/error/nothing vs. build bugging.
Thanks,
drew
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-07-29 14:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-07-11 10:10 [PATCH 0/3] hw/arm/virt: Introduce kvm-steal-time Andrew Jones
2020-07-11 10:10 ` [PATCH 1/3] hw/arm/virt: Move post cpu realize check into its own function Andrew Jones
2020-07-21 10:03 ` Peter Maydell
2020-07-11 10:10 ` [PATCH 2/3] hw/arm/virt: Move kvm pmu setup to virt_cpu_post_init Andrew Jones
2020-07-21 10:02 ` Peter Maydell
2020-07-29 13:51 ` Andrew Jones
2020-07-11 10:10 ` [PATCH 3/3] hw/arm/virt: Implement kvm-steal-time Andrew Jones
2020-07-21 10:46 ` Peter Maydell
2020-07-29 14:40 ` Andrew Jones [this message]
2020-08-03 15:18 ` Andrew Jones
2020-07-31 14:54 ` Peter Maydell
2020-08-01 12:00 ` Andrew Jones
2020-08-03 15:16 ` Andrew Jones
2020-07-20 10:16 ` [PATCH 0/3] hw/arm/virt: Introduce kvm-steal-time Peter Maydell
2020-07-27 8:33 ` Andrew Jones
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=20200729144050.pzl4t3pnpt2zg36u@kamzik.brq.redhat.com \
--to=drjones@redhat.com \
--cc=beata.michalska@linaro.org \
--cc=peter.maydell@linaro.org \
--cc=qemu-arm@nongnu.org \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.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).