Hi Alex,
On Mon, 08 Jul 2024 17:28:11 +0100,
Alexandru Elisei <alexandru.elisei@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hi Marc,
>
> On Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 02:34:59PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> > Another task that a hypervisor supporting NV on arm64 has to deal with
> > is to emulate the AT instruction, because we multiplex all the S1
> > translations on a single set of registers, and the guest S2 is never
> > truly resident on the CPU.
> >
> > So given that we lie about page tables, we also have to lie about
> > translation instructions, hence the emulation. Things are made
> > complicated by the fact that guest S1 page tables can be swapped out,
> > and that our shadow S2 is likely to be incomplete. So while using AT
> > to emulate AT is tempting (and useful), it is not going to always
> > work, and we thus need a fallback in the shape of a SW S1 walker.
> >
> > This series is built in 4 basic blocks:
> >
> > - Add missing definition and basic reworking
> >
> > - Dumb emulation of all relevant AT instructions using AT instructions
> >
> > - Add a SW S1 walker that is using our S2 walker
>
> I wanted to have a look at the S1 walker, and in my inbox I only have
> patches #1 to #9 ("KVM: arm64: nv: Make ps_to_output_size() generally
> available"). Checked on the kvm mailing list archive [1], same thing; a
> google search for the string "KVM: arm64: nv: Add SW walker for AT S1
> emulation" (quotes included) turns up the cover letter.
>
> Am I looking in the wrong places?
>
> [1] https://www.spinics.net/lists/kvm/msg351826.html
This is very odd. I probably have sent them by specifying 000*patch
instead of 00*patch, hence the truncation to 9 patches.
Let me try and send the delta. With a bit of luck, it won't make a
mess in the archive[1].
Thanks for the heads up,
M.
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240625133508.259829-1-maz@xxxxxxxxx
--
Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.
