[PATCH] arm/arm64: KVM: Handle out-of-RAM cache maintenance as a NOP

[Marc Zyngier]

On 11/02/16 08:43, Christoffer Dall wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 08, 2016 at 02:37:25PM +0000, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>> So far, our handling of cache maintenance by VA has been pretty
>> simple: Either the access is in the guest RAM and generates a S2
>> fault, which results in the page being mapped RW, or we go down
>> the io_mem_abort() path, and nuke the guest.
>>
>> The first one is fine, but the second one is extremely weird.
>> Treating the CM as an I/O is wrong, and nothing in the ARM ARM
>> indicates that we should generate a fault for something that
>> cannot end-up in the cache anyway (even if the guest maps it,
>> it will keep on faulting at stage-2 for emulation).
>>
>> So let's just skip this instruction, and let the guest get away
>> with it.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier at arm.com>
>> ---
>>  arch/arm/include/asm/kvm_emulate.h   |  5 +++++
>>  arch/arm/kvm/mmu.c                   | 17 +++++++++++++++++
>>  arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_emulate.h |  5 +++++
>>  3 files changed, 27 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm/include/asm/kvm_emulate.h b/arch/arm/include/asm/kvm_emulate.h
>> index 3095df0..f768797 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm/include/asm/kvm_emulate.h
>> +++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/kvm_emulate.h
>> @@ -143,6 +143,11 @@ static inline bool kvm_vcpu_dabt_iss1tw(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>>  	return kvm_vcpu_get_hsr(vcpu) & HSR_DABT_S1PTW;
>>  }
>>  
>> +static inline bool kvm_vcpu_dabt_iscm(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>> +{
>> +	return !!(kvm_vcpu_get_hsr(vcpu) & HSR_DABT_CM);
>> +}
>> +
>>  /* Get Access Size from a data abort */
>>  static inline int kvm_vcpu_dabt_get_as(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>>  {
>> diff --git a/arch/arm/kvm/mmu.c b/arch/arm/kvm/mmu.c
>> index aba61fd..1a5f2ea 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm/kvm/mmu.c
>> +++ b/arch/arm/kvm/mmu.c
>> @@ -1431,6 +1431,23 @@ int kvm_handle_guest_abort(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct kvm_run *run)
>>  		}
>>  
>>  		/*
>> +		 * Check for a cache maintenance operation. Since we
>> +		 * ended-up here, we know it is outside of any memory
>> +		 * slot. But we can't find out if that is for a device,
>> +		 * or if the guest is just being stupid (going all the
>> +		 * way to userspace is not an option - what would you
>> +		 * write?).
> 
> I'm not sure what the stuff about "what would you write?" means, I'm
> assuming it means that the ISV bit is clear.

What I was trying to say that is that if you really wanted to find out
whether the range the guest is trying to access is a device or just a
non-existent address, you'd have to go all the way to userspace to check
that there is actually a device there. But then, what should the access
be? Read or Write? We don't have a non-destructive "check access" operation.

> I think the point is more that if there's no S2 mapping, then there
> could never be any cache entries as a result of memory accesses using
> the GVA in question, so there's nothing to invalidate (like you state in
> your commit message).

Agreed. I may just write that instead.

> 
>> +		 *
>> +		 * So let's assume that the guest is just being
>> +		 * cautious, and skip the instruction.
>> +		 */
>> +		if (kvm_vcpu_dabt_iscm(vcpu)) {
>> +			kvm_skip_instr(vcpu, kvm_vcpu_trap_il_is32bit(vcpu));
>> +			ret = 1;
>> +			goto out_unlock;
>> +		}
>> +
>> +		/*
>>  		 * The IPA is reported as [MAX:12], so we need to
>>  		 * complement it with the bottom 12 bits from the
>>  		 * faulting VA. This is always 12 bits, irrespective
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_emulate.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_emulate.h
>> index 3066328..01cdf5f 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_emulate.h
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_emulate.h
>> @@ -185,6 +185,11 @@ static inline bool kvm_vcpu_dabt_iss1tw(const struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>>  	return !!(kvm_vcpu_get_hsr(vcpu) & ESR_ELx_S1PTW);
>>  }
>>  
>> +static inline bool kvm_vcpu_dabt_iscm(const struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>> +{
>> +	return !!(kvm_vcpu_get_hsr(vcpu) & ESR_ELx_CM);
>> +}
>> +
>>  static inline int kvm_vcpu_dabt_get_as(const struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>>  {
>>  	return 1 << ((kvm_vcpu_get_hsr(vcpu) & ESR_ELx_SAS) >> ESR_ELx_SAS_SHIFT);
>> -- 
>> 2.1.4
>>
> 
> some nitpicking: if you modify anything here, I think is_cm is more clear than iscm.

Fair enough, I'll amend it.

> 
> But besides the cosmetics:
> 
> Reviewed-by: Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall at linaro.org>
> 

Thanks!

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