On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 06:11:31PM +0800, wei.guo.simon@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
> From: Simon Guo <wei.guo.simon@xxxxxxxxx>
>
> The mfspr/mtspr on TM SPRs(TEXASR/TFIAR/TFHAR) are non-privileged
> instructions and can be executed at PR KVM guest without trapping
> into host in problem state. We only emulate mtspr/mfspr
> texasr/tfiar/tfhar at guest PR=0 state.
>
> When we are emulating mtspr tm sprs at guest PR=0 state, the emulation
> result need to be visible to guest PR=1 state. That is, the actual TM
> SPR val should be loaded into actual registers.
>
> We already flush TM SPRs into vcpu when switching out of CPU, and load
> TM SPRs when switching back.
>
> This patch corrects mfspr()/mtspr() emulation for TM SPRs to make the
> actual source/dest based on actual TM SPRs.
>
> Signed-off-by: Simon Guo <wei.guo.simon@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_emulate.c | 35 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------
> 1 file changed, 27 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_emulate.c b/arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_emulate.c
> index e096d01..c2836330 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_emulate.c
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_emulate.c
> @@ -521,13 +521,26 @@ int kvmppc_core_emulate_mtspr_pr(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, int sprn, ulong spr_val)
> break;
> #ifdef CONFIG_PPC_TRANSACTIONAL_MEM
> case SPRN_TFHAR:
> - vcpu->arch.tfhar = spr_val;
> - break;
> case SPRN_TEXASR:
> - vcpu->arch.texasr = spr_val;
> - break;
> case SPRN_TFIAR:
> - vcpu->arch.tfiar = spr_val;
> + if (MSR_TM_ACTIVE(kvmppc_get_msr(vcpu))) {
> + /* it is illegal to mtspr() TM regs in
> + * other than non-transactional state.
> + */
> + kvmppc_core_queue_program(vcpu, SRR1_PROGTM);
> + emulated = EMULATE_AGAIN;
> + break;
> + }
We also need to check that the guest has TM enabled in the guest MSR,
and give them a facility unavailable interrupt if not.
> +
> + tm_enable();
> + if (sprn == SPRN_TFHAR)
> + mtspr(SPRN_TFHAR, spr_val);
> + else if (sprn == SPRN_TEXASR)
> + mtspr(SPRN_TEXASR, spr_val);
> + else
> + mtspr(SPRN_TFIAR, spr_val);
> + tm_disable();
I haven't seen any checks that we are on a CPU that has TM. What
happens if a guest does a mtmsrd with TM=1 and then a mtspr to TEXASR
when running on a POWER7 (assuming the host kernel was compiled with
CONFIG_PPC_TRANSACTIONAL_MEM=y)?
Ideally, if the host CPU does not have TM functionality, these mtsprs
would be treated as no-ops and attempts to set the TM or TS fields in
the guest MSR would be ignored.
> +
> break;
> #endif
> #endif
> @@ -674,13 +687,19 @@ int kvmppc_core_emulate_mfspr_pr(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, int sprn, ulong *spr_val
> break;
> #ifdef CONFIG_PPC_TRANSACTIONAL_MEM
> case SPRN_TFHAR:
> - *spr_val = vcpu->arch.tfhar;
> + tm_enable();
> + *spr_val = mfspr(SPRN_TFHAR);
> + tm_disable();
> break;
> case SPRN_TEXASR:
> - *spr_val = vcpu->arch.texasr;
> + tm_enable();
> + *spr_val = mfspr(SPRN_TEXASR);
> + tm_disable();
> break;
> case SPRN_TFIAR:
> - *spr_val = vcpu->arch.tfiar;
> + tm_enable();
> + *spr_val = mfspr(SPRN_TFIAR);
> + tm_disable();
> break;
These need to check MSR_TM in the guest MSR, and become no-ops on
machines without TM capability.
Paul.
