[PATCH v6 00/26] KVM: arm64: Introduce pKVM hyp VM and vCPU state at EL2

[Marc Zyngier]

On Thu, 10 Nov 2022 19:02:33 +0000,
Will Deacon <will at kernel.org> wrote:
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> This is version six of the pKVM EL2 state series, extending the pKVM
> hypervisor code so that it can dynamically instantiate and manage VM
> data structures without the host being able to access them directly.
> These structures consist of a hyp VM, a set of hyp vCPUs and the stage-2
> page-table for the MMU. The pages used to hold the hypervisor structures
> are returned to the host when the VM is destroyed.
> 
> Previous versions are archived at:
> 
>   Mega-patch: https://lore.kernel.org/kvmarm/20220519134204.5379-1-will@kernel.org/
>   v2: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220630135747.26983-1-will@kernel.org/
>   v3: https://lore.kernel.org/kvmarm/20220914083500.5118-1-will@kernel.org/
>   v4: https://lore.kernel.org/kvm/20221017115209.2099-1-will@kernel.org/
>   v5: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20221020133827.5541-1-will@kernel.org
> 
> The changes since v5 include:
> 
>   * Fix teardown ordering so that the host 'kvm' structure remains pins
>     while the memcache is being filled.
> 
>   * Fixed a kerneldoc typo.
> 
>   * Included a patch from Oliver to rework the 'pkvm_mem_transition'
>     structure and it's handling of the completer address.
> 
>   * Tweaked some commit messages and added new R-b tags.
> 
> As before, the final patch is RFC since it illustrates a very naive use
> of the new hypervisor structures and subsequent changes will improve on
> this once we have the guest private memory story sorted out.
> 
> Oliver: I'm pretty sure we're going to need to revert your completer
> address cleanup as soon as we have guest-host sharing. We want to keep
> the 'pkvm_mem_transition' structure 'const', but we will only know the
> host address (PA) after walking the guest stage-2 and so we're going to
> want to track that separately. Anyway, I've included it here at the end
> so Marc can decide what he wants to do!

Thanks, I guess... :-/

If this patch is going to be reverted, I'd rather not take it (without
guest/host sharing, we don't have much of a hypervisor).

I guess we can always revisit this in the light of the avalanche of
pKVM patches that will follow...

Cheers,

	M.

-- 
Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.