Re: [PATCH v6 1/4] kvm: arm64: introduce new flag for non-cacheable IO memory

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Thu, Feb 08, 2024 at 02:16:49AM +0530, ankita@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/pgtable.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/pgtable.c
> index c651df904fe3..2a893724ee9b 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/pgtable.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/pgtable.c
> @@ -717,15 +717,28 @@ void kvm_tlb_flush_vmid_range(struct kvm_s2_mmu *mmu,
>  static int stage2_set_prot_attr(struct kvm_pgtable *pgt, enum kvm_pgtable_prot prot,
>  				kvm_pte_t *ptep)
>  {
> -	bool device = prot & KVM_PGTABLE_PROT_DEVICE;
> -	kvm_pte_t attr = device ? KVM_S2_MEMATTR(pgt, DEVICE_nGnRE) :
> -			    KVM_S2_MEMATTR(pgt, NORMAL);
> +	kvm_pte_t attr;
>  	u32 sh = KVM_PTE_LEAF_ATTR_LO_S2_SH_IS;
>  
> +	switch (prot & (KVM_PGTABLE_PROT_DEVICE |
> +			KVM_PGTABLE_PROT_NORMAL_NC)) {
> +	case 0:
> +		attr = KVM_S2_MEMATTR(pgt, NORMAL);
> +		break;
> +	case KVM_PGTABLE_PROT_DEVICE:
> +		if (prot & KVM_PGTABLE_PROT_X)
> +			return -EINVAL;
> +		attr = KVM_S2_MEMATTR(pgt, DEVICE_nGnRE);
> +		break;
> +	case KVM_PGTABLE_PROT_NORMAL_NC:
> +		attr = KVM_S2_MEMATTR(pgt, NORMAL_NC);
> +		break;

Does it make sense to allow executable here as well? I don't think it's
harmful but not sure there's a use-case for it either.

> +	default:
> +		WARN_ON_ONCE(1);

Return -EINVAL?

-- 
Catalin




[Index of Archives]     [KVM ARM]     [KVM ia64]     [KVM ppc]     [Virtualization Tools]     [Spice Development]     [Libvirt]     [Libvirt Users]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Questions]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]

  Powered by Linux