Hi Christoffer,
On 2013-10-22 10:08, Christoffer Dall wrote:
> Support creating the ARM VGIC device through the KVM_CREATE_DEVICE
> ioctl, which can then later be leveraged to use the
> KVM_{GET/SET}_DEVICE_ATTR, which is useful both for setting addresses
> in
> a more generic API than the ARM-specific one and is useful for
> save/restore of VGIC state.
>
> Adds KVM_CAP_DEVICE_CTRL to ARM capabilities.
>
> Note that we change the check for creating a VGIC from bailing out if
> any VCPUs were created to bailing if any VCPUs were ever run. This
> is
> an important distinction that doesn't break anything, but allows
> creating the VGIC after the VCPUs have been created.
>
> Signed-off-by: Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Reviewed-by: Alexander Graf <agraf@xxxxxxx>
> ---
> Documentation/virtual/kvm/devices/arm-vgic.txt | 10 ++++++
> arch/arm/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h | 1 -
> arch/arm/kvm/arm.c | 1 +
> include/linux/kvm_host.h | 1 +
> include/uapi/linux/kvm.h | 1 +
> virt/kvm/arm/vgic.c | 46
> ++++++++++++++++++++++--
> virt/kvm/kvm_main.c | 5 +++
> 7 files changed, 62 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> create mode 100644 Documentation/virtual/kvm/devices/arm-vgic.txt
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/virtual/kvm/devices/arm-vgic.txt
> b/Documentation/virtual/kvm/devices/arm-vgic.txt
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..38f27f7
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/Documentation/virtual/kvm/devices/arm-vgic.txt
> @@ -0,0 +1,10 @@
> +ARM Virtual Generic Interrupt Controller (VGIC)
> +===============================================
> +
> +Device types supported:
> + KVM_DEV_TYPE_ARM_VGIC_V2 ARM Generic Interrupt Controller v2.0
> +
> +Only one VGIC instance may be instantiated through either this API
> or the
> +legacy KVM_CREATE_IRQCHIP api. The created VGIC will act as the VM
> interrupt
> +controller, requiring emulated user-space devices to inject
> interrupts to the
> +VGIC instead of directly to CPUs.
> diff --git a/arch/arm/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h
> b/arch/arm/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h
> index c1ee007..1c85102 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h
> +++ b/arch/arm/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h
> @@ -142,7 +142,6 @@ struct kvm_arch_memory_slot {
> #define KVM_REG_ARM_VFP_FPINST 0x1009
> #define KVM_REG_ARM_VFP_FPINST2 0x100A
>
> -
Nit: pointless change?
> /* KVM_IRQ_LINE irq field index values */
> #define KVM_ARM_IRQ_TYPE_SHIFT 24
> #define KVM_ARM_IRQ_TYPE_MASK 0xff
> diff --git a/arch/arm/kvm/arm.c b/arch/arm/kvm/arm.c
> index 2b1091a..ab96af2 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/kvm/arm.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/kvm/arm.c
> @@ -187,6 +187,7 @@ int kvm_dev_ioctl_check_extension(long ext)
> case KVM_CAP_IRQCHIP:
> r = vgic_present;
> break;
> + case KVM_CAP_DEVICE_CTRL:
> case KVM_CAP_USER_MEMORY:
> case KVM_CAP_SYNC_MMU:
> case KVM_CAP_DESTROY_MEMORY_REGION_WORKS:
> diff --git a/include/linux/kvm_host.h b/include/linux/kvm_host.h
> index ca645a0..2906b79 100644
> --- a/include/linux/kvm_host.h
> +++ b/include/linux/kvm_host.h
> @@ -1065,6 +1065,7 @@ struct kvm_device *kvm_device_from_filp(struct
> file *filp);
>
> extern struct kvm_device_ops kvm_mpic_ops;
> extern struct kvm_device_ops kvm_xics_ops;
> +extern struct kvm_device_ops kvm_arm_vgic_ops;
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_HAVE_KVM_CPU_RELAX_INTERCEPT
>
> diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/kvm.h b/include/uapi/linux/kvm.h
> index 99c2533..2d50233 100644
> --- a/include/uapi/linux/kvm.h
> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/kvm.h
> @@ -843,6 +843,7 @@ struct kvm_device_attr {
> #define KVM_DEV_TYPE_FSL_MPIC_20 1
> #define KVM_DEV_TYPE_FSL_MPIC_42 2
> #define KVM_DEV_TYPE_XICS 3
> +#define KVM_DEV_TYPE_ARM_VGIC_V2 4
How about calling it GIC_V2 instead of VGIC_V2? As far as the guest is
concerned, this is a "true" GIC, and the other names don't imply any
distinction either...
> /*
> * ioctls for VM fds
> diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/vgic.c b/virt/kvm/arm/vgic.c
> index 5ce100f..79a8bae 100644
> --- a/virt/kvm/arm/vgic.c
> +++ b/virt/kvm/arm/vgic.c
> @@ -1434,15 +1434,23 @@ out:
>
> int kvm_vgic_create(struct kvm *kvm)
> {
> - int ret = 0;
> + int i, ret = 0;
> + struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu;
>
> mutex_lock(&kvm->lock);
>
> - if (atomic_read(&kvm->online_vcpus) || kvm->arch.vgic.vctrl_base) {
> + if (kvm->arch.vgic.vctrl_base) {
> ret = -EEXIST;
> goto out;
> }
>
> + kvm_for_each_vcpu(i, vcpu, kvm) {
> + if (vcpu->arch.has_run_once) {
> + ret = -EBUSY;
> + goto out;
> + }
> + }
Isn't this racy? What prevents anyone from starting a CPU while you're
in this loop?
> spin_lock_init(&kvm->arch.vgic.lock);
> kvm->arch.vgic.vctrl_base = vgic_vctrl_base;
> kvm->arch.vgic.vgic_dist_base = VGIC_ADDR_UNDEF;
> @@ -1511,3 +1519,37 @@ int kvm_vgic_set_addr(struct kvm *kvm,
> unsigned long type, u64 addr)
> mutex_unlock(&kvm->lock);
> return r;
> }
> +
> +static int vgic_set_attr(struct kvm_device *dev, struct
> kvm_device_attr *attr)
> +{
> + return -ENXIO;
> +}
> +
> +static int vgic_get_attr(struct kvm_device *dev, struct
> kvm_device_attr *attr)
> +{
> + return -ENXIO;
> +}
> +
> +static int vgic_has_attr(struct kvm_device *dev, struct
> kvm_device_attr *attr)
> +{
> + return -ENXIO;
> +}
> +
> +static void vgic_destroy(struct kvm_device *dev)
> +{
> + kfree(dev);
> +}
> +
> +static int vgic_create(struct kvm_device *dev, u32 type)
> +{
> + return kvm_vgic_create(dev->kvm);
> +}
> +
> +struct kvm_device_ops kvm_arm_vgic_ops = {
> + .name = "kvm-arm-vgic",
> + .create = vgic_create,
> + .destroy = vgic_destroy,
> + .set_attr = vgic_set_attr,
> + .get_attr = vgic_get_attr,
> + .has_attr = vgic_has_attr,
> +};
> diff --git a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
> index bf040c4..534fd3a 100644
> --- a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
> +++ b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
> @@ -2265,6 +2265,11 @@ static int kvm_ioctl_create_device(struct kvm
> *kvm,
> ops = &kvm_xics_ops;
> break;
> #endif
> +#ifdef CONFIG_KVM_ARM_VGIC
> + case KVM_DEV_TYPE_ARM_VGIC_V2:
> + ops = &kvm_arm_vgic_ops;
> + break;
> +#endif
> default:
> return -ENODEV;
> }
Cheers,
M.
--
Who you jivin' with that Cosmik Debris?
_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
kvmarm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/kvmarm
