[PATCH 1/5] KVM: arm64: Allow creating the PMU without the in-kernel GIC

[Marc Zyngier]

On 03/05/17 19:32, Christoffer Dall wrote:
> Since we got support for devices in userspace which allows reporting the
> PMU overflow output status to userspace, we should actually allow
> creating the PMU on systems without an in-kernel irqchip, which in turn
> requires us to slightly clarify error codes for the ABI and move things
> around for the initialization phase.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Christoffer Dall <cdall at linaro.org>
> ---
>  Documentation/virtual/kvm/devices/vcpu.txt | 16 +++++++++-------
>  virt/kvm/arm/pmu.c                         | 27 +++++++++++++++++----------
>  2 files changed, 26 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/virtual/kvm/devices/vcpu.txt b/Documentation/virtual/kvm/devices/vcpu.txt
> index 02f5068..352af6e 100644
> --- a/Documentation/virtual/kvm/devices/vcpu.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/virtual/kvm/devices/vcpu.txt
> @@ -16,7 +16,9 @@ Parameters: in kvm_device_attr.addr the address for PMU overflow interrupt is a
>  Returns: -EBUSY: The PMU overflow interrupt is already set
>           -ENXIO: The overflow interrupt not set when attempting to get it
>           -ENODEV: PMUv3 not supported
> -         -EINVAL: Invalid PMU overflow interrupt number supplied
> +         -EINVAL: Invalid PMU overflow interrupt number supplied or
> +                  trying to set the IRQ number without using an in-kernel
> +                  irqchip.
>  
>  A value describing the PMUv3 (Performance Monitor Unit v3) overflow interrupt
>  number for this vcpu. This interrupt could be a PPI or SPI, but the interrupt
> @@ -25,11 +27,11 @@ all vcpus, while as an SPI it must be a separate number per vcpu.
>  
>  1.2 ATTRIBUTE: KVM_ARM_VCPU_PMU_V3_INIT
>  Parameters: no additional parameter in kvm_device_attr.addr
> -Returns: -ENODEV: PMUv3 not supported
> -         -ENXIO: PMUv3 not properly configured as required prior to calling this
> -                 attribute
> +Returns: -ENODEV: PMUv3 not supported or GIC not initialized
> +         -ENXIO: PMUv3 not properly configured or in-kernel irqchip not
> +                 conigured as required prior to calling this attribute
>           -EBUSY: PMUv3 already initialized
>  
> -Request the initialization of the PMUv3.  This must be done after creating the
> -in-kernel irqchip.  Creating a PMU with a userspace irqchip is currently not
> -supported.
> +Request the initialization of the PMUv3.  If using the PMUv3 with an in-kernel
> +virtual GIC implementation, this must be done after initializing the in-kernel
> +irqchip.
> diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/pmu.c b/virt/kvm/arm/pmu.c
> index 4b43e7f..f046b08 100644
> --- a/virt/kvm/arm/pmu.c
> +++ b/virt/kvm/arm/pmu.c
> @@ -456,21 +456,25 @@ static int kvm_arm_pmu_v3_init(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>  	if (!kvm_arm_support_pmu_v3())
>  		return -ENODEV;
>  
> -	/*
> -	 * We currently require an in-kernel VGIC to use the PMU emulation,
> -	 * because we do not support forwarding PMU overflow interrupts to
> -	 * userspace yet.
> -	 */
> -	if (!irqchip_in_kernel(vcpu->kvm) || !vgic_initialized(vcpu->kvm))
> -		return -ENODEV;
> -
> -	if (!test_bit(KVM_ARM_VCPU_PMU_V3, vcpu->arch.features) ||
> -	    !kvm_arm_pmu_irq_initialized(vcpu))
> +	if (!test_bit(KVM_ARM_VCPU_PMU_V3, vcpu->arch.features))
>  		return -ENXIO;
>  
>  	if (kvm_arm_pmu_v3_ready(vcpu))
>  		return -EBUSY;
>  
> +	if (irqchip_in_kernel(vcpu->kvm)) {
> +		/*
> +		 * If using the PMU with an in-kernel virtual GIC
> +		 * implementation, we require the GIC to be already
> +		 * initialized when initializing the PMU.
> +		 */
> +		if (!vgic_initialized(vcpu->kvm))
> +			return -ENODEV;
> +
> +		if (!kvm_arm_pmu_irq_initialized(vcpu))
> +			return -ENXIO;
> +	}
> +
>  	kvm_pmu_vcpu_reset(vcpu);
>  	vcpu->arch.pmu.ready = true;
>  
> @@ -512,6 +516,9 @@ int kvm_arm_pmu_v3_set_attr(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct kvm_device_attr *attr)
>  		int __user *uaddr = (int __user *)(long)attr->addr;
>  		int irq;
>  
> +		if (!irqchip_in_kernel(vcpu->kvm))
> +			return -EINVAL;
> +

Shouldn't we fail the same way for {get,has}_attr? get_attr is going to
generate a -ENXIO, and has_attr is going to lie about the availability
of KVM_ARM_VCPU_PMU_V3_IRQ...

>  		if (!test_bit(KVM_ARM_VCPU_PMU_V3, vcpu->arch.features))
>  			return -ENODEV;
>  
> 

Thanks,

	M.
-- 
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...