On 30 June 2016 at 13:02, Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@xxxxxxx> wrote: > On 30/06/16 11:42, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: >> On 30 June 2016 at 12:16, Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@xxxxxxx> wrote: >>> On 30/06/16 10:22, Marc Zyngier wrote: >>>> On 28/06/16 13:42, Christoffer Dall wrote: >>>>> On Tue, Jun 07, 2016 at 11:58:25AM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote: >>>>>> As we move towards a selectable HYP VA range, it is obvious that >>>>>> we don't want to test a variable to find out if we need to use >>>>>> the bottom VA range, the top VA range, or use the address as is >>>>>> (for VHE). >>>>>> >>>>>> Instead, we can expand our current helpers to generate the right >>>>>> mask or nop with code patching. We default to using the top VA >>>>>> space, with alternatives to switch to the bottom one or to nop >>>>>> out the instructions. >>>>>> >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@xxxxxxx> >>>>>> --- >>>>>> arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_hyp.h | 27 ++++++++++++-------------- >>>>>> arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_mmu.h | 42 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--- >>>>>> 2 files changed, 51 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-) >>>>>> >>>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_hyp.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_hyp.h >>>>>> index 61d01a9..dd4904b 100644 >>>>>> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_hyp.h >>>>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_hyp.h >>>>>> @@ -25,24 +25,21 @@ >>>>>> >>>>>> #define __hyp_text __section(.hyp.text) notrace >>>>>> >>>>>> -static inline unsigned long __kern_hyp_va(unsigned long v) >>>>>> -{ >>>>>> - asm volatile(ALTERNATIVE("and %0, %0, %1", >>>>>> - "nop", >>>>>> - ARM64_HAS_VIRT_HOST_EXTN) >>>>>> - : "+r" (v) : "i" (HYP_PAGE_OFFSET_MASK)); >>>>>> - return v; >>>>>> -} >>>>>> - >>>>>> -#define kern_hyp_va(v) (typeof(v))(__kern_hyp_va((unsigned long)(v))) >>>>>> - >>>>>> static inline unsigned long __hyp_kern_va(unsigned long v) >>>>>> { >>>>>> - asm volatile(ALTERNATIVE("orr %0, %0, %1", >>>>>> - "nop", >>>>>> + u64 mask; >>>>>> + >>>>>> + asm volatile(ALTERNATIVE("mov %0, %1", >>>>>> + "mov %0, %2", >>>>>> + ARM64_HYP_OFFSET_LOW) >>>>>> + : "=r" (mask) >>>>>> + : "i" (~HYP_PAGE_OFFSET_HIGH_MASK), >>>>>> + "i" (~HYP_PAGE_OFFSET_LOW_MASK)); >>>>>> + asm volatile(ALTERNATIVE("nop", >>>>>> + "mov %0, xzr", >>>>>> ARM64_HAS_VIRT_HOST_EXTN) >>>>>> - : "+r" (v) : "i" (~HYP_PAGE_OFFSET_MASK)); >>>>>> - return v; >>>>>> + : "+r" (mask)); >>>>>> + return v | mask; >>>>> >>>>> If mask is ~HYP_PAGE_OFFSET_LOW_MASK how can you be sure that setting >>>>> bit (VA_BITS - 1) is always the right thing to do to generate a kernel >>>>> address? >>>> >>>> It has taken be a while, but I think I finally see what you mean. We >>>> have no idea whether that bit was set or not. >>>> >>>>> This is kind of what I asked before only now there's an extra bit not >>>>> guaranteed by the architecture to be set for the kernel range, I >>>>> think. >>>> >>>> Yeah, I finally connected the couple of neurons left up there (that's >>>> what remains after the whole brexit braindamage). This doesn't work (or >>>> rather it only works sometimes). The good new is that I also realized we >>>> don't need any of that crap. >>>> >>>> The only case we currently use a HVA->KVA transformation is to pass the >>>> panic string down to panic(), and we can perfectly prevent >>>> __kvm_hyp_teardown from ever be evaluated as a HVA with a bit of >>>> asm-foo. This allows us to get rid of this whole function. >>> >>> Here's what I meant by this: >>> >>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/switch.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/switch.c >>> index 437cfad..c19754d 100644 >>> --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/switch.c >>> +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/switch.c >>> @@ -299,9 +299,16 @@ static const char __hyp_panic_string[] = "HYP panic:\nPS:%08llx PC:%016llx ESR:% >>> >>> static void __hyp_text __hyp_call_panic_nvhe(u64 spsr, u64 elr, u64 par) >>> { >>> - unsigned long str_va = (unsigned long)__hyp_panic_string; >>> + unsigned long str_va; >>> >>> - __hyp_do_panic(hyp_kern_va(str_va), >>> + /* >>> + * Force the panic string to be loaded from the literal pool, >>> + * making sure it is a kernel address and not a PC-relative >>> + * reference. >>> + */ >>> + asm volatile("ldr %0, =__hyp_panic_string" : "=r" (str_va)); >>> + >> >> Wouldn't it suffice to make __hyp_panic_string a non-static pointer >> to const char? That way, it will be statically initialized with a >> kernel VA, and the external linkage forces the compiler to evaluate >> its value at runtime. > > Yup, that would work as well. The only nit is that the pointer needs to be > in the __hyp_text section, and my compiler is shouting at me with this: > > CC arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/switch.o > arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/switch.c: In function '__hyp_call_panic_vhe': > arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/switch.c:298:13: error: __hyp_panic_string causes a section type conflict with __fpsimd_enabled_nvhe > const char *__hyp_panic_string __section(.hyp.text) = "HYP panic:\nPS:%08llx PC:%016llx ESR:%08llx\nFAR:%016llx HPFAR:%016llx PAR:%016llx\nVCPU:%p\n"; > ^ > arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/switch.c:22:24: note: '__fpsimd_enabled_nvhe' was declared here > static bool __hyp_text __fpsimd_enabled_nvhe(void) > > Any clue? > The pointer is writable/non-exec and the code is readonly/exec, so it makes sense for the compiler to complain about this. It needs to be non-const, though, to prevent the compiler from short-circuiting the evaluation, so the only solution would be to add a .hyp.data section to the linker script, and put the __hyp_panic_string pointer in there. Not worth the trouble, perhaps ... -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html