[PATCH 03/11] KVM: arm64: Make kvm_skip_instr() and co private to HYP
Marc Zyngier
maz at kernel.org
Tue Oct 27 12:17:31 EDT 2020
On 2020-10-26 14:04, Mark Rutland wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 26, 2020 at 01:34:42PM +0000, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>> In an effort to remove the vcpu PC manipulations from EL1 on nVHE
>> systems, move kvm_skip_instr() to be HYP-specific. EL1's intent
>> to increment PC post emulation is now signalled via a flag in the
>> vcpu structure.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier <maz at kernel.org>
>
> [...]
>
>> +/*
>> + * Adjust the guest PC on entry, depending on flags provided by EL1
>> + * for the purpose of emulation (MMIO, sysreg).
>> + */
>> +static inline void __adjust_pc(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>> +{
>> + if (vcpu->arch.flags & KVM_ARM64_INCREMENT_PC) {
>> + kvm_skip_instr(vcpu);
>> + vcpu->arch.flags &= ~KVM_ARM64_INCREMENT_PC;
>> + }
>> +}
>
> What's your plan for restricting *when* EL1 can ask for the PC to be
> adjusted?
>
> I'm assuming that either:
>
> 1. You have EL2 sanity-check all responses from EL1 are permitted for
> the current state. e.g. if EL1 asks to increment the PC, EL2 must
> check that that was a sane response for the current state.
>
> 2. You raise the level of abstraction at the EL2/EL1 boundary, such
> that
> EL2 simply knows. e.g. if emulating a memory access, EL1 can either
> provide the response or signal an abort, but doesn't choose to
> manipulate the PC as EL2 will infer the right thing to do.
>
> I know that either are tricky in practice, so I'm curious what your
> view
> is. Generally option #2 is easier to fortify, but I guess we might have
> to do #1 since we also have to support unprotected VMs?
To be honest, I'm still in two minds about it, which is why I have
gone with this "middle of the road" option (moving the PC update
to EL2, but leave the control at EL1).
I guess the answer is "it depends". MMIO is easy to put in the #2 model,
while things like WFI/WFE really need #1. sysregs are yet another can of
worm.
M.
--
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list