On Fri, 20 Jan 2023 10:14:16 +0000, Will Deacon <will@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 13, 2023 at 05:25:22PM +0000, Marc Zyngier wrote: > > Systems with a VMID-tagged PIPT i-cache have been supported for > > a while by Linux and KVM. However, these systems never appeared > > on our side of the multiverse. > > > > Refuse to initialise KVM on such a machine, should then ever appear. > > Following changes will drop the support from the hypervisor. > > > > Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier <maz@xxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > arch/arm64/kvm/arm.c | 5 +++++ > > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/arm.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/arm.c > > index 9c5573bc4614..508deed213a2 100644 > > --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/arm.c > > +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/arm.c > > @@ -2195,6 +2195,11 @@ int kvm_arch_init(void *opaque) > > int err; > > bool in_hyp_mode; > > > > + if (icache_is_vpipt()) { > > + kvm_info("Incompatible VPIPT I-Cache policy\n"); > > + return -ENODEV; > > + } > > Hmm, does this work properly with late CPU onlining? For example, if my set > of boot CPUs are all friendly PIPT and KVM initialises happily, but then I > late online a CPU with a horrible VPIPT policy, I worry that we'll quietly > do the wrong thing wrt maintenance. Yup. The problem is what do we do in that case? Apart from preventing the late onlining itself? > > If that's the case, then arguably we already have a bug in the cases where > we trap and emulate accesses to CTR_EL0 from userspace because I _think_ > we'll change the L1Ip field at runtime after userspace could've already read > it. > > Is there something that stops us from ended up in this situation? Probably not. Userspace will observe the wrong thing, and this applies to *any* late onlining with a more restrictive cache topology (such as PIPT -> VIPT). Unclear how the trapping will be engaged on the *other* CPUs as well... I've tried to reverse-engineer the cpufeature arrays again, and failed to find a good solution for this. Suzuki, what do you think? M. -- Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.