On Mon, Oct 16, 2023 at 12:02:27PM -0700, Raghavendra Rao Ananta wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 16, 2023 at 6:35 AM Sebastian Ott <sebott@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, 9 Oct 2023, Raghavendra Rao Ananta wrote:
> > > u64 kvm_vcpu_read_pmcr(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> > > {
> > > - return __vcpu_sys_reg(vcpu, PMCR_EL0);
> > > + u64 pmcr = __vcpu_sys_reg(vcpu, PMCR_EL0) &
> > > + ~(ARMV8_PMU_PMCR_N_MASK << ARMV8_PMU_PMCR_N_SHIFT);
> > > +
> > > + return pmcr | ((u64)vcpu->kvm->arch.pmcr_n << ARMV8_PMU_PMCR_N_SHIFT);
> > > }
> > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c
> > > index ff0f7095eaca..c750722fbe4a 100644
> > > --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c
> > > +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c
> > > @@ -745,12 +745,8 @@ static u64 reset_pmcr(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, const struct sys_reg_desc *r)
> > > {
> > > u64 pmcr;
> > >
> > > - /* No PMU available, PMCR_EL0 may UNDEF... */
> > > - if (!kvm_arm_support_pmu_v3())
> > > - return 0;
> > > -
> > > /* Only preserve PMCR_EL0.N, and reset the rest to 0 */
> > > - pmcr = read_sysreg(pmcr_el0) & (ARMV8_PMU_PMCR_N_MASK << ARMV8_PMU_PMCR_N_SHIFT);
> > > + pmcr = kvm_vcpu_read_pmcr(vcpu) & (ARMV8_PMU_PMCR_N_MASK << ARMV8_PMU_PMCR_N_SHIFT);
> >
> > pmcr = ((u64)vcpu->kvm->arch.pmcr_n << ARMV8_PMU_PMCR_N_SHIFT);
> > Would that maybe make it more clear what is done here?
> >
> Since we require the entire PMCR register, and not just the PMCR.N
> field, I think using kvm_vcpu_read_pmcr() would be technically
> correct, don't you think?
No, this isn't using the entire PMCR value, it is just grabbing
PMCR_EL0.N.
What's the point of doing this in the first place? The implementation of
kvm_vcpu_read_pmcr() is populating PMCR_EL0.N using the VM-scoped value.
--
Thanks,
Oliver
