Re: [PATCH v9 5/8] KVM: arm64: Support PUD hugepage in stage2_is_exec()

[Christoffer Dall]

On Wed, Dec 05, 2018 at 05:57:51PM +0000, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
> 
> 
> On 01/11/2018 13:38, Christoffer Dall wrote:
> >On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 05:57:42PM +0000, Punit Agrawal wrote:
> >>In preparation for creating PUD hugepages at stage 2, add support for
> >>detecting execute permissions on PUD page table entries. Faults due to
> >>lack of execute permissions on page table entries is used to perform
> >>i-cache invalidation on first execute.
> >>
> >>Provide trivial implementations of arm32 helpers to allow sharing of
> >>code.
> >>
> >>Signed-off-by: Punit Agrawal <punit.agrawal@xxxxxxx>
> >>Reviewed-by: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@xxxxxxx>
> >>Cc: Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@xxxxxxx>
> >>Cc: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@xxxxxxx>
> >>Cc: Russell King <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >>Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@xxxxxxx>
> >>Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@xxxxxxx>
> >>---
> >>  arch/arm/include/asm/kvm_mmu.h         |  6 +++
> >>  arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_mmu.h       |  5 +++
> >>  arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable-hwdef.h |  2 +
> >>  virt/kvm/arm/mmu.c                     | 53 +++++++++++++++++++++++---
> >>  4 files changed, 61 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> >>
> >>diff --git a/arch/arm/include/asm/kvm_mmu.h b/arch/arm/include/asm/kvm_mmu.h
> >>index 37bf85d39607..839a619873d3 100644
> >>--- a/arch/arm/include/asm/kvm_mmu.h
> >>+++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/kvm_mmu.h
> >>@@ -102,6 +102,12 @@ static inline bool kvm_s2pud_readonly(pud_t *pud)
> >>  	return false;
> >>  }
> >>+static inline bool kvm_s2pud_exec(pud_t *pud)
> >>+{
> >>+	BUG();
> >
> >nit: I think this should be WARN() now :)
> >
> >>+	return false;
> >>+}
> >>+
> >>  static inline pte_t kvm_s2pte_mkwrite(pte_t pte)
> >>  {
> >>  	pte_val(pte) |= L_PTE_S2_RDWR;
> >>diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_mmu.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_mmu.h
> >>index 8da6d1b2a196..c755b37b3f92 100644
> >>--- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_mmu.h
> >>+++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_mmu.h
> >>@@ -261,6 +261,11 @@ static inline bool kvm_s2pud_readonly(pud_t *pudp)
> >>  	return kvm_s2pte_readonly((pte_t *)pudp);
> >>  }
> >>+static inline bool kvm_s2pud_exec(pud_t *pudp)
> >>+{
> >>+	return !(READ_ONCE(pud_val(*pudp)) & PUD_S2_XN);
> >>+}
> >>+
> >>  #define hyp_pte_table_empty(ptep) kvm_page_empty(ptep)
> >>  #ifdef __PAGETABLE_PMD_FOLDED
> >>diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable-hwdef.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable-hwdef.h
> >>index 1d7d8da2ef9b..336e24cddc87 100644
> >>--- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable-hwdef.h
> >>+++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable-hwdef.h
> >>@@ -193,6 +193,8 @@
> >>  #define PMD_S2_RDWR		(_AT(pmdval_t, 3) << 6)   /* HAP[2:1] */
> >>  #define PMD_S2_XN		(_AT(pmdval_t, 2) << 53)  /* XN[1:0] */
> >>+#define PUD_S2_XN		(_AT(pudval_t, 2) << 53)  /* XN[1:0] */
> >>+
> >>  /*
> >>   * Memory Attribute override for Stage-2 (MemAttr[3:0])
> >>   */
> >>diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/mmu.c b/virt/kvm/arm/mmu.c
> >>index 1c669c3c1208..8e44dccd1b47 100644
> >>--- a/virt/kvm/arm/mmu.c
> >>+++ b/virt/kvm/arm/mmu.c
> >>@@ -1083,23 +1083,66 @@ static int stage2_set_pmd_huge(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_mmu_memory_cache
> >>  	return 0;
> >>  }
> >>-static bool stage2_is_exec(struct kvm *kvm, phys_addr_t addr)
> >>+/*
> >>+ * stage2_get_leaf_entry - walk the stage2 VM page tables and return
> >>+ * true if a valid and present leaf-entry is found. A pointer to the
> >>+ * leaf-entry is returned in the appropriate level variable - pudpp,
> >>+ * pmdpp, ptepp.
> >>+ */
> >>+static bool stage2_get_leaf_entry(struct kvm *kvm, phys_addr_t addr,
> >>+				  pud_t **pudpp, pmd_t **pmdpp, pte_t **ptepp)
> >
> >Do we need this type madness or could this just return a u64 pointer
> >(NULL if nothing is found) and pass that to kvm_s2pte_exec (because we
> >know it's the same bit we need to check regardless of the pgtable level
> >on both arm and arm64)?
> >
> >Or do we consider that bad for some reason?
> 
> Practically, yes the bit positions are same and thus we should be able
> to do this assuming that it is just a pte. When we get to independent stage2
> pgtable implementation which treats all page table entries as a single type
> with a level information, we should be able to get rid of these.
> But since we have followed the Linux way of page-table manipulation where we
> have "level" specific accessors. The other option is open code the walking
> sequence from the pgd to the leaf entry everywhere.
> 
> I am fine with changing this code, if you like.
> 

Meh, it just looked a bit over-engineered to me when I originally looked
at the patches, but you're right, they align with the rest of the
implementation.

Thanks,

    Christoffer