Hey,
On Tue, Aug 20, 2024 at 11:03:40AM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> We so far only write the ICH_HCR_EL2 config in two situations:
>
> - when we need to emulate the GICv3 CPU interface due to HW bugs
>
> - when we do direct injection, as the virtual CPU interface needs
> to be enabled
>
> This is all good. But it also means that we don't do anything special
> when we emulate a GICv2, or that there is no GIC at all.
>
> What happens in this case when the guest uses the GICv3 system
> registers? The *guest* gets a trap for a sysreg access (EC=0x18)
> while we'd really like it to get an UNDEF.
>
> Fixing this is a bit involved:
>
> - we need to set all the required trap bits (TC, TALL0, TALL1, TDIR)
>
> - for these traps to take effect, we need to (counter-intuitively)
> set ICC_SRE_EL1.SRE to 1 so that the above traps take priority.
>
> Note that doesn't fully work when GICv2 emulation is enabled, as
> we cannot set ICC_SRE_EL1.SRE to 1 (it breaks Group0 delivery as
> IRQ).
Just to make sure I'm following completely, GICv2-on-GICv3 guest sees
the (barf) architected behavior of sysreg traps going to EL1.
> Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier <maz@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/vgic-v3-sr.c | 22 ++++++++++++++++------
> arch/arm64/kvm/vgic/vgic-v3.c | 5 ++++-
> 2 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/vgic-v3-sr.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/vgic-v3-sr.c
> index 7b397fad26f2..a184def8f5ad 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/vgic-v3-sr.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/vgic-v3-sr.c
> @@ -268,8 +268,16 @@ void __vgic_v3_activate_traps(struct vgic_v3_cpu_if *cpu_if)
> * starting to mess with the rest of the GIC, and VMCR_EL2 in
> * particular. This logic must be called before
> * __vgic_v3_restore_state().
> + *
> + * However, if the vgic is disabled (ICH_HCR_EL2.EN==0), no GIC is
> + * provisionned at all. In order to prevent illegal accesses to the
typo: provisioned
> + * system registers to trap to EL1 (duh), force ICC_SRE_EL1.SRE to 1
> + * so that the trap bits can take effect. Yes, we *loves* the GIC.
> */
> - if (!cpu_if->vgic_sre) {
> + if (!(cpu_if->vgic_hcr & ICH_HCR_EN)) {
> + write_gicreg(ICC_SRE_EL1_SRE, ICC_SRE_EL1);
> + isb();
> + } else if (!cpu_if->vgic_sre) {
> write_gicreg(0, ICC_SRE_EL1);
> isb();
> write_gicreg(cpu_if->vgic_vmcr, ICH_VMCR_EL2);
> @@ -288,8 +296,9 @@ void __vgic_v3_activate_traps(struct vgic_v3_cpu_if *cpu_if)
> }
>
> /*
> - * Prevent the guest from touching the GIC system registers if
> - * SRE isn't enabled for GICv3 emulation.
> + * Prevent the guest from touching the ICC_SRE_EL1 system
> + * register. Note that this may not have any effect, as
> + * ICC_SRE_EL2.Enable being RAO/WI is a valid implementation.
So this behavior is weird but still 'safe' as, ICC_SRE_EL1.SRE is also RAO/WI
and the HCR traps are still effective. Right?
> */
> write_gicreg(read_gicreg(ICC_SRE_EL2) & ~ICC_SRE_EL2_ENABLE,
> ICC_SRE_EL2);
> @@ -297,10 +306,11 @@ void __vgic_v3_activate_traps(struct vgic_v3_cpu_if *cpu_if)
> /*
> * If we need to trap system registers, we must write
> * ICH_HCR_EL2 anyway, even if no interrupts are being
> - * injected,
> + * injected. Note that this also applies if we don't expect
> + * any system register access (GICv2 or no vgic at all).
We don't expect the traps to come in the GICv2 case, though, right?
Looks alright to me otherwise, but blech!
--
Thanks,
Oliver
