On Fri, Mar 11, 2022 at 05:57:12PM +0000, Oliver Upton wrote: > This is a prototype for supporting KVM_CAP_ARM_SYSTEM_SUSPEND on > kvmtool. The capability allows userspace to expose the SYSTEM_SUSPEND > PSCI call to its guests. > > Implement SYSTEM_SUSPEND using KVM_MP_STATE_SUSPENDED, which emulates > the execution of a WFI instruction in the kernel. Resume the guest when > a wakeup event is recognized and reset it to the requested entry address > and context ID. > > Patches 2-4 are small reworks to more easily shoehorn PSCI support into > kvmtool. > > Patch 5 adds some SMCCC handlers and makes use of them to implement PSCI > SYSTEM_SUSPEND. For now, just check the bare-minimum, that all vCPUs > besides the caller have stopped. There are also checks that can be made > against the requested entry address, but they are at the discretion of > the implementation. > > Tested with 'echo mem > /sys/power/state' to see that the vCPU is in > fact placed in a suspended state for the PSCI call. Hacked the switch > statement to fall through to WAKEUP immediately after to verify the vCPU > is set up correctly for resume. > > It would be nice if kvmtool actually provided a device good for wakeups, > since the RTC implementation has omitted any interrupt support. > > kernel changes: http://lore.kernel.org/r/20220311174001.605719-1-oupton@xxxxxxxxxx > > Oliver Upton (5): > TESTONLY: Sync KVM headers with pending changes > Allow architectures to hook KVM_EXIT_SYSTEM_EVENT > ARM: Stash vcpu_init in the vCPU structure > ARM: Add a helper to re-init a vCPU > ARM: Implement PSCI SYSTEM_SUSPEND > > arm/aarch32/kvm-cpu.c | 72 ++++++++++++++++++++ > arm/aarch64/kvm-cpu.c | 66 +++++++++++++++++++ > arm/include/arm-common/kvm-cpu-arch.h | 23 ++++--- > arm/kvm-cpu.c | 95 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++- > arm/kvm.c | 9 +++ > include/kvm/kvm-cpu.h | 1 + > include/linux/kvm.h | 21 ++++++ > kvm-cpu.c | 8 +++ > 8 files changed, 283 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-) Looks like the kernel-side changes are queued now, so please can you resend this series? I also think you can drop the AArch32 support, unless you see a compelling reason for it? Will
