On Fri, Apr 12, 2024 at 09:42:09AM +0100, Steven Price wrote: > From: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@xxxxxxx> > > Device mappings (currently) need to be emulated by the VMM so must be > mapped shared with the host. You say "currently". What's the plan when the device is not emulated? How would the guest distinguish what's emulated and what's not to avoid setting the PROT_NS_SHARED bit? > Signed-off-by: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@xxxxxxx> > Signed-off-by: Steven Price <steven.price@xxxxxxx> > --- > arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h > index f5376bd567a1..db71c564ec21 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h > +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h > @@ -598,7 +598,7 @@ static inline void set_pud_at(struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned long addr, > #define pgprot_writecombine(prot) \ > __pgprot_modify(prot, PTE_ATTRINDX_MASK, PTE_ATTRINDX(MT_NORMAL_NC) | PTE_PXN | PTE_UXN) > #define pgprot_device(prot) \ > - __pgprot_modify(prot, PTE_ATTRINDX_MASK, PTE_ATTRINDX(MT_DEVICE_nGnRE) | PTE_PXN | PTE_UXN) > + __pgprot_modify(prot, PTE_ATTRINDX_MASK, PTE_ATTRINDX(MT_DEVICE_nGnRE) | PTE_PXN | PTE_UXN | PROT_NS_SHARED) This pgprot_device() is not the only one used to map device resources. pgprot_writecombine() is another commonly macro. It feels like a hack to plug one but not the other and without any way for the guest to figure out what's emulated. Can the DT actually place those emulated ranges in the higher IPA space so that we avoid randomly adding this attribute for devices? -- Catalin
