On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 10:15:32AM -0500, Gustavo Romero wrote:
> On P9 DD2.2 due to a CPU defect some TM instructions need to be emulated by
> KVM. This is handled at first by the hardware raising a softpatch interrupt
> when certain TM instructions that need KVM assistance are executed in the
> guest. Some TM instructions, although not defined in the Power ISA, might
> raise a softpatch interrupt. For instance, 'tresume.' instruction as
> defined in the ISA must have bit 31 set (1), but an instruction that
> matches 'tresume.' OP and XO opcodes but has bit 31 not set (0), like
> 0x7cfe9ddc, also raises a softpatch interrupt, for example, if a code
> like the following is executed in the guest it will raise a softpatch
> interrupt just like a 'tresume.' when the TM facility is enabled:
>
> int main() { asm("tabort. 0; .long 0x7cfe9ddc;"); }
>
> Currently in such a case KVM throws a complete trace like the following:
[snip]
> and then treats the executed instruction as 'nop' whilst it should actually
> be treated as an illegal instruction since it's not defined by the ISA.
>
> This commit changes the handling of the case above by treating the
> unrecognized TM instructions that can raise a softpatch but are not
> defined in the ISA as illegal ones instead of as 'nop' and by gently
> reporting it to the host instead of throwing a trace.
>
> Signed-off-by: Gustavo Romero <gromero@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reviewed-by: Segher Boessenkool <segher@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_hv_tm.c | 6 +++++-
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_hv_tm.c b/arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_hv_tm.c
> index 0db937497169..d342a9e11298 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_hv_tm.c
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_hv_tm.c
> @@ -3,6 +3,8 @@
> * Copyright 2017 Paul Mackerras, IBM Corp. <paulus@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> */
>
> +#define pr_fmt(fmt) KBUILD_MODNAME ": " fmt
> +
> #include <linux/kvm_host.h>
>
> #include <asm/kvm_ppc.h>
> @@ -208,6 +210,8 @@ int kvmhv_p9_tm_emulation(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> }
>
> /* What should we do here? We didn't recognize the instruction */
> - WARN_ON_ONCE(1);
> + kvmppc_core_queue_program(vcpu, SRR1_PROGILL);
> + pr_warn_ratelimited("Unrecognized TM-related instruction %#x for emulation", instr);
> +
> return RESUME_GUEST;
> }
Do we actually know it is TM-related here? Otherwise, looks good to me :-)
Segher
