[PATCH 4/5] KVM: arm64: Initialize HCR_EL2.E2H early
Oliver Upton
oupton at kernel.org
Wed Jul 1 16:45:44 PDT 2026
On Wed, Jul 01, 2026 at 08:43:41PM +0000, Colton Lewis wrote:
> From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland at arm.com>
>
> [ Upstream commit 7a68b55ff39b0d2dcd92ee241b12b23a7e03c621 ]
>
> On CPUs without FEAT_E2H0, HCR_EL2.E2H is RES1, but may reset to an
> UNKNOWN value out of reset and consequently may not read as 1 unless it
> has been explicitly initialized.
>
> We handled this for the head.S boot code in commits:
>
> 3944382fa6f22b54 ("arm64: Treat HCR_EL2.E2H as RES1 when ID_AA64MMFR4_EL1.E2H0 is negative")
> b3320142f3db9b3f ("arm64: Fix early handling of FEAT_E2H0 not being implemented")
>
> Unfortunately, we forgot to apply a similar fix to the KVM PSCI entry
> points used when relaying CPU_ON, CPU_SUSPEND, and SYSTEM SUSPEND. When
> KVM is entered via these entry points, the value of HCR_EL2.E2H may be
> consumed before it has been initialized (e.g. by the 'init_el2_state'
> macro).
>
> Initialize HCR_EL2.E2H early in these paths such that it can be consumed
> reliably. The existing code in head.S is factored out into a new
> 'init_el2_hcr' macro, and this is used in the __kvm_hyp_init_cpu()
> function common to all the relevant PSCI entry points.
>
> For clarity, I've tweaked the assembly used to check whether
> ID_AA64MMFR4_EL1.E2H0 is negative. The bitfield is extracted as a signed
> value, and this is checked with a signed-greater-or-equal (GE) comparison.
>
> As the hyp code will reconfigure HCR_EL2 later in ___kvm_hyp_init(), all
> bits other than E2H are initialized to zero in __kvm_hyp_init_cpu().
>
> Fixes: 3944382fa6f22b54 ("arm64: Treat HCR_EL2.E2H as RES1 when ID_AA64MMFR4_EL1.E2H0 is negative")
> Fixes: b3320142f3db9b3f ("arm64: Fix early handling of FEAT_E2H0 not being implemented")
> Signed-off-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland at arm.com>
> Cc: Ahmed Genidi <ahmed.genidi at arm.com>
> Cc: Ben Horgan <ben.horgan at arm.com>
> Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas at arm.com>
> Cc: Leo Yan <leo.yan at arm.com>
> Cc: Marc Zyngier <maz at kernel.org>
> Cc: Oliver Upton <oliver.upton at linux.dev>
> Cc: Will Deacon <will at kernel.org>
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250227180526.1204723-2-mark.rutland@arm.com
> [maz: fixed LT->GE thinko]
> Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier <maz at kernel.org>
>
> [ Backport: Resolved conflict in arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/nvhe/hyp-init.S
> by extracting EL2 state initialization into __kvm_init_el2_state
> and calling it after HCR setup. ]
> ---
> arch/arm64/include/asm/el2_setup.h | 26 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> arch/arm64/kernel/head.S | 19 +------------------
> arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/nvhe/hyp-init.S | 16 +++++++++++++---
> 3 files changed, 40 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/el2_setup.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/el2_setup.h
> index b7afaa026842b..3498dc5d02c18 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/el2_setup.h
> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/el2_setup.h
> @@ -16,6 +16,32 @@
> #include <asm/sysreg.h>
> #include <linux/irqchip/arm-gic-v3.h>
>
> +.macro init_el2_hcr val
> + mov_q x0, \val
> +
> + /*
> + * Compliant CPUs advertise their VHE-onlyness with
> + * ID_AA64MMFR4_EL1.E2H0 < 0. On such CPUs HCR_EL2.E2H is RES1, but it
> + * can reset into an UNKNOWN state and might not read as 1 until it has
> + * been initialized explicitly.
> + *
> + * Fruity CPUs seem to have HCR_EL2.E2H set to RAO/WI, but
> + * don't advertise it (they predate this relaxation).
> + *
> + * Initalize HCR_EL2.E2H so that later code can rely upon HCR_EL2.E2H
> + * indicating whether the CPU is running in E2H mode.
> + */
> + mrs_s x1, SYS_ID_AA64MMFR4_EL1
> + sbfx x1, x1, #ID_AA64MMFR4_EL1_E2H0_SHIFT, #ID_AA64MMFR4_EL1_E2H0_WIDTH
> + cmp x1, #0
> + b.ge .LnVHE_\@
> +
> + orr x0, x0, #HCR_E2H
> +.LnVHE_\@:
> + msr hcr_el2, x0
> + isb
> +.endm
> +
> .macro __init_el2_sctlr
> mov_q x0, INIT_SCTLR_EL2_MMU_OFF
> msr sctlr_el2, x0
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/head.S b/arch/arm64/kernel/head.S
> index e0e710b36da37..ff7769821166a 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/head.S
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/head.S
> @@ -575,25 +575,8 @@ SYM_INNER_LABEL(init_el2, SYM_L_LOCAL)
> msr sctlr_el2, x0
> isb
> 0:
> - mov_q x0, HCR_HOST_NVHE_FLAGS
> -
> - /*
> - * Compliant CPUs advertise their VHE-onlyness with
> - * ID_AA64MMFR4_EL1.E2H0 < 0. HCR_EL2.E2H can be
> - * RES1 in that case. Publish the E2H bit early so that
> - * it can be picked up by the init_el2_state macro.
> - *
> - * Fruity CPUs seem to have HCR_EL2.E2H set to RAO/WI, but
> - * don't advertise it (they predate this relaxation).
> - */
> - mrs_s x1, SYS_ID_AA64MMFR4_EL1
> - tbz x1, #(ID_AA64MMFR4_EL1_E2H0_SHIFT + ID_AA64MMFR4_EL1_E2H0_WIDTH - 1), 1f
> -
> - orr x0, x0, #HCR_E2H
> -1:
> - msr hcr_el2, x0
> - isb
>
> + init_el2_hcr HCR_HOST_NVHE_FLAGS
> init_el2_state
>
> /* Hypervisor stub */
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/nvhe/hyp-init.S b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/nvhe/hyp-init.S
> index 1cc06e6797bda..a08363b9b10fd 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/nvhe/hyp-init.S
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/nvhe/hyp-init.S
> @@ -75,6 +75,16 @@ __do_hyp_init:
> eret
> SYM_CODE_END(__kvm_hyp_init)
>
> +/*
> + * Initialize EL2 CPU state to sane values.
> + *
> + * HCR_EL2.E2H must have been initialized already.
> + */
> +SYM_CODE_START_LOCAL(__kvm_init_el2_state)
> + init_el2_state // Clobbers x0..x2
> + finalise_el2_state
> + ret
> +SYM_CODE_END(__kvm_init_el2_state)
> /*
> * Initialize the hypervisor in EL2.
> *
> @@ -202,9 +212,9 @@ SYM_CODE_START_LOCAL(__kvm_hyp_init_cpu)
>
> 2: msr SPsel, #1 // We want to use SP_EL{1,2}
>
> - /* Initialize EL2 CPU state to sane values. */
> - init_el2_state // Clobbers x0..x2
> - finalise_el2_state
> + init_el2_hcr 0
> +
> + bl __kvm_init_el2_state
Please don't churn unrelated code. Leave everything where it is and make
sure init_el2_hcr is done before the others.
Thanks,
Oliver
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list