Re: [PATCH] arm64: KVM: Skip PSTATE.PAN reest at EL2 in non-VHE
Date: Mon Sep 11 2017 - 07:49:46 EST
On 2017/9/11 19:20, Vladimir Murzin wrote:
> On 11/09/17 12:16, Dongjiu Geng wrote:
>> PSTATE.PAN disables reading and/or writing to a userspace virtual
>> address from EL1 in non-VHE or from EL2 in VHE. In non-VHE, there is
>> no any userspace mapping at EL2, so no need to reest the PSTATE.PAN.
>> Signed-off-by: Dongjiu Geng <gengdongjiu@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> Signed-off-by: Haibin Zhang <zhanghaibin7@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/entry.S | 6 +++++-
>> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/entry.S b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/entry.S
>> index 12ee62d6d410..86a7549b1b4c 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/entry.S
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/entry.S
>> @@ -96,8 +96,12 @@ ENTRY(__guest_exit)
>> add x1, x1, #VCPU_CONTEXT
>> - ALTERNATIVE(nop, SET_PSTATE_PAN(1), ARM64_HAS_PAN, CONFIG_ARM64_PAN)
>> +alternative_if_not ARM64_HAS_VIRT_HOST_EXTN
>> + b 2f // skip PAN at EL2 in non-VHE
>> + ALTERNATIVE(nop, SET_PSTATE_PAN(1), ARM64_HAS_PAN, CONFIG_ARM64_PAN)
>> // Store the guest regs x2 and x3
>> stp x2, x3, [x1, #CPU_XREG_OFFSET(2)]
> Ok. Probably I need to say why original patch did not consider non-VHE case:
> - VHE and PAN features come within the same v8.1 extension bundle, so it is
> unlucky to see IRL implementation with PAN but no VHE.
> - Given above the only case where extra PAN instruction could count is
> VHE-enabled system with CONFIG_ARM64_VHE is not set; However, IMO, usecase for
> such setup is kind of debugging; it is quite obvious that those who care of
> performance should not disable VHE in the first place...
thanks for the explanation.
> In general it is not polite to keep posting patches in a middle of the merge
> window - people are busy with more important stuff...
I do not know when you are busy and in merge window