On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 04:06:51PM +0800, Gavin Shan wrote:
> This supports SDEI_VERSION hypercall by returning v1.1, which is
> the specification version we're following. The vendor is set to
> 'KVM'.
>
> Signed-off-by: Gavin Shan <gshan@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> arch/arm64/kvm/sdei.c | 10 ++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/sdei.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/sdei.c
> index 8a9b477b8977..5a3a64cd6e84 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/sdei.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/sdei.c
> @@ -118,6 +118,14 @@ static bool remove_all_vcpu_events(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
> return pending;
> }
>
> +static unsigned long hypercall_version(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> +{
> + /* v1.1 and the vendor is KVM */
> + return (1UL << SDEI_VERSION_MAJOR_SHIFT) |
> + (1UL << SDEI_VERSION_MINOR_SHIFT) |
> + 0x4b564d;
It looks like the SDEI specification states that the vendor-defined
version number is 32 bits. Could we just use one of the
ARM_SMCCC_VENDOR_HYP_UID_KVM_REG_{0,3} values instead?
ASCII 'KVM' is neat, but in reality guest software will just throw it in
a macro regardless. Might as well use one of the values we've already
trained it to use :-)
Also, it would appear that guest discovery of SDEI relies upon KVM
reporting a valid SDEI version. IMO, this patch should come at the very
end when KVM actually implements SDEI.
--
Thanks,
Oliver
_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
kvmarm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
