[PATCH v10 00/59] KVM: arm64: ARMv8.3/8.4 Nested Virtualization support

[Eric Auger]

Hi Marc,

On 6/6/23 18:22, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On Tue, 06 Jun 2023 10:29:36 +0100,
> Eric Auger <eauger at redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Marc,
>> On 6/6/23 09:30, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>>> Hey Eric,
>>>
>>> On Mon, 05 Jun 2023 12:28:12 +0100,
>>> Eric Auger <eauger at redhat.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi Marc,
>>>>
>>>> On 5/15/23 19:30, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>>>>> This is the 4th drop of NV support on arm64 for this year.
>>>>>
>>>>> For the previous episodes, see [1].
>>>>>
>>>>> What's changed:
>>>>>
>>>>> - New framework to track system register traps that are reinjected in
>>>>>   guest EL2. It is expected to replace the discrete handling we have
>>>>>   enjoyed so far, which didn't scale at all. This has already fixed a
>>>>>   number of bugs that were hidden (a bunch of traps were never
>>>>>   forwarded...). Still a work in progress, but this is going in the
>>>>>   right direction.
>>>>>
>>>>> - Allow the L1 hypervisor to have a S2 that has an input larger than
>>>>>   the L0 IPA space. This fixes a number of subtle issues, depending on
>>>>>   how the initial guest was created.
>>>>>
>>>>> - Consequently, the patch series has gone longer again. Boo. But
>>>>>   hopefully some of it is easier to review...
>>>>>
>>>>> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230405154008.3552854-1-maz@kernel.org
>>>>>
>>>>> Andre Przywara (1):
>>>>>   KVM: arm64: nv: vgic: Allow userland to set VGIC maintenance IRQ
>>>>
>>>> I guess you have executed kselftests on L1 guests. Have all the tests
>>>> passed there? On my end it stalls in the KVM_RUN.
>>>
>>> No, I hardly run any kselftest, because they are just not designed to
>>> run at EL2 at all. There's some work to be done there, but I just
>>> don't have the bandwidth for that (hint, wink...)
>>
>> oh OK, I missed that point. If nobody is working on this I can start
>> looking at it. Would be interesting to run them on nested guest too.
> 
> If you want to pick this up, it would be extremely helpful. And no,
> nobody is really looking into it at the moment, so it's all yours!

OK I will study that then :-)

Eric
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> 	M.
>