On Mon, May 02, 2022 at 02:19:30PM +0800, Gavin Shan wrote:
> Hi Oliver,
>
> On 5/1/22 2:50 PM, Oliver Upton wrote:
> > On Sun, Apr 03, 2022 at 11:39:06PM +0800, Gavin Shan wrote:
> > > This supports SDEI_EVENT_{COMPLETE, COMPLETE_AND_RESUME} hypercall.
> > > They are used by guest to notify the completion of event in its
> > > handler. The previously interrupted or preempted context is restored
> > > like below.
> > >
> > > * x0 - x17, PC and PState are restored to what values we had in
> > > the interrupted or preempted context.
> > >
> > > * If it's SDEI_EVENT_COMPLETE_AND_RESUME hypercall, IRQ exception
> > > is injected.
> >
> > I don't think that's how COMPLETE_AND_RESUME works. The caller specifies an
> > address at which it would like to begin execution within the client
> > exception level.
> >
> > SDEI spec suggests this behaves like a synchronous exception. DEN 0054C
> > 5.2.2 'Event Resume Context' speaks more about how it is supposed to
> > work.
> >
>
> It's actually the linux convention. If the event handler, which was
> specified in previous hypercall to EVENT_REGISTER, returns success,
> the (linux) client calls into COMPLETE_AND_RESUME and the resume
> address is specified with FIQ vector offset. More details can be
> found from arch/arm64/kernel::sdei.c::do_sdei_event().
Right -- but look at what its doing. It returns the address at which it
wants to resume execution.
arch/arm64/kernel.entry.S::__sdei_asm_handler winds up passing this as
an argument to COMPLETE_AND_RESUME. Also, what would happen if we run
something that isn't Linux inside of KVM? This is why I suggested
implementing COMPLETE_AND_RESUME in line with the specification, not
based on what the kernel is presently doing.
--
Thanks,
Oliver
_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
kvmarm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
