Hi Alexandru,
On 2020-01-27 10:36, Alexandru Elisei wrote:
According to the ARM ARM, registers CNT{P,V}_TVAL_EL0 have bits [63:32]
RES0 [1]. When reading the register, the value is truncated to the
least
significant 32 bits [2], and on writes, TimerValue is treated as a
signed
32-bit integer [1, 2].
When the guest behaves correctly and writes 32-bit values, treating
TVAL
as an unsigned 64 bit register works as expected. However, things start
to break down when the guest writes larger values, because
(u64)0x1_ffff_ffff = 8589934591. but (s32)0x1_ffff_ffff = -1, and the
former will cause the timer interrupt to be asserted in the future, but
the latter will cause it to be asserted now. Let's treat TVAL as a
signed 32-bit register on writes, to match the behaviour described in
the architecture, and the behaviour experimentally exhibited by the
virtual timer on a non-vhe host.
[1] Arm DDI 0487E.a, section D13.8.18
[2] Arm DDI 0487E.a, section D11.2.4
Signed-off-by: Alexandru Elisei <alexandru.elisei@xxxxxxx>
Huhuh... Nice catch!
Fixes: 8fa761624871 ("KVM: arm/arm64: arch_timer: Fix CNTP_TVAL
calculation")
(how many times are we doing to fix this???)
---
include/kvm/arm_arch_timer.h | 2 ++
virt/kvm/arm/arch_timer.c | 3 ++-
2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/include/kvm/arm_arch_timer.h
b/include/kvm/arm_arch_timer.h
index d120e6c323e7..be912176b7a3 100644
--- a/include/kvm/arm_arch_timer.h
+++ b/include/kvm/arm_arch_timer.h
@@ -10,6 +10,8 @@
#include <linux/clocksource.h>
#include <linux/hrtimer.h>
+#define ARCH_TIMER_TVAL_MASK ((1ULL << 32) - 1)
+
enum kvm_arch_timers {
TIMER_PTIMER,
TIMER_VTIMER,
diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/arch_timer.c b/virt/kvm/arm/arch_timer.c
index f182b2380345..5d40f17f7024 100644
--- a/virt/kvm/arm/arch_timer.c
+++ b/virt/kvm/arm/arch_timer.c
@@ -805,6 +805,7 @@ static u64 kvm_arm_timer_read(struct kvm_vcpu
*vcpu,
switch (treg) {
case TIMER_REG_TVAL:
val = timer->cnt_cval - kvm_phys_timer_read() + timer->cntvoff;
+ val &= ARCH_TIMER_TVAL_MASK;
nit: Do we really need this mask? I'd rather see it written as
val = lower_32_bits(val);
break;
case TIMER_REG_CTL:
@@ -850,7 +851,7 @@ static void kvm_arm_timer_write(struct kvm_vcpu
*vcpu,
{
switch (treg) {
case TIMER_REG_TVAL:
- timer->cnt_cval = kvm_phys_timer_read() - timer->cntvoff + val;
+ timer->cnt_cval = kvm_phys_timer_read() - timer->cntvoff + (s32)val;
break;
case TIMER_REG_CTL:
Otherwise, looks good to me. If you're OK with the above change, I'll
take it as a fix.
Thanks,
M.
--
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...
_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
kvmarm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
