[PATCH v18] arm64: mm: Handle Granule Protection Faults (GPFs)
Suzuki K Poulose
suzuki.poulose at arm.com
Tue Sep 22 08:14:54 PDT 2026
On 22/09/2026 15:49, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 22, 2026 at 02:21:13PM +0100, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
>> I had another look and we could handle this via kvm_fault_is_gmem_abort()
>> see in arch/arm64/kvm/mmu.c:
>>
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/mmu.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/mmu.c
>> index 87e49251e0447..af5a4bf961aae 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/mmu.c
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/mmu.c
>> @@ -1731,6 +1731,9 @@ static int gmem_abort(const struct kvm_s2_fault_desc
>> *s2fd)
>> gfn_t gfn;
>> int ret;
>>
>> + if (!kvm_slot_has_gmem(s2fd->memslot))
>> + return -EINVAL;
>
> I wonder whether we should add a KVM_BUG_ON() here. With the rest of the
> changes, we should never get in this situation. Well, to be revisited
> for private devices.
Sure, I could add that
>
> Also maybe move it to the caller, kvm_vm_mem_abort(), and not change
> kvm_fault_is_gmem_abort(). Something like:
>
> if (private_ipa_fault(kvm, s2fd->fault_ipa) &&
> KVM_BUG_ON(!kvm_slot_has_gmem(s2fd->memslot), kvm))
> return -EIO;
>
> To me it makes more sense for gmem_abort() to be called only *if* it's a
> gmem slot. So any inconsistency, avoiding user_mem_abort() for private
> memory, should be done in the caller. I assume the caller will also have
> to route the private device path as well rather than rely on
> gmem_abort().
Agree.
>
>> +
>> if (!perm_fault) {
>> memcache = get_mmu_memcache(vcpu);
>> ret = topup_mmu_memcache(vcpu, memcache);
>> @@ -2277,10 +2280,12 @@ static bool private_ipa_fault(struct kvm *kvm,
>> phys_addr_t fault_ipa);
>> static bool kvm_fault_is_gmem_abort(struct kvm *kvm,
>> const struct kvm_s2_fault_desc *s2fd)
>> {
>> - if (!kvm_slot_has_gmem(s2fd->memslot))
>> - return false;
>> if (kvm_memslot_is_gmem_only(s2fd->memslot))
>> return true;
>> + /*
>> + * For Realms, all private faults must be backed by GMEM.
>> + * TODO: Handle Trusted device private memory mappings.
>> + */
>> if (private_ipa_fault(kvm, s2fd->fault_ipa))
>> return true;
>> return false;
>>
>>
>> Also, I have the following hunk for preventing memslot modifications.
>> I will add this to v20 integration branch, which is almost ready ;-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/mmu.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/mmu.c
>> index 582b48e34486b..87e49251e0447 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/mmu.c
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/mmu.c
>> @@ -2783,6 +2783,18 @@ void kvm_arch_commit_memory_region(struct kvm *kvm,
>> }
>> }
>>
>> +static bool kvm_prevents_memslot_change(struct kvm *kvm, enum kvm_mr_change change)
>> +{
>> + /* Cannot modify memslots once a pVM has run or Realm created */
>> + if (change != KVM_MR_DELETE && change != KVM_MR_MOVE)
>> + return false;
>> +
>> + if ((kvm_vm_is_protected_pkvm(kvm) && pkvm_hyp_vm_is_created(kvm)) ||
>> + kvm_realm_is_created(kvm))
>> + return true;
>> + return false;
>> +}
>> +
>> int kvm_arch_prepare_memory_region(struct kvm *kvm,
>> const struct kvm_memory_slot *old,
>> struct kvm_memory_slot *new,
>> @@ -2791,12 +2803,9 @@ int kvm_arch_prepare_memory_region(struct kvm *kvm,
>> hva_t hva, reg_end;
>> int ret = 0;
>>
>> - if (kvm_vm_is_protected_pkvm(kvm)) {
>> - /* Cannot modify memslots once a pVM has run. */
>> - if (pkvm_hyp_vm_is_created(kvm) &&
>> - (change == KVM_MR_DELETE || change == KVM_MR_MOVE)) {
>> + if (kvm_vm_is_protected(kvm)) {
>> + if (kvm_prevents_memslot_change(kvm, change))
>> return -EPERM;
>> - }
>>
>> if (new &&
>> new->flags & (KVM_MEM_LOG_DIRTY_PAGES | KVM_MEM_READONLY)) {
>
> I think this should work.
Cheers
Suzuki
>
> Thanks.
>
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list