On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 4:27 AM, Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@xxxxxxx> wrote: > On 23/04/13 23:59, Christoffer Dall wrote: >> On Mon, Apr 08, 2013 at 05:17:17PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote: >>> Let userspace play with the guest registers. >>> >>> Reviewed-by: Christopher Covington <cov@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>> Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@xxxxxxx> >>> --- >>> arch/arm64/kvm/guest.c | 254 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>> 1 file changed, 254 insertions(+) >>> create mode 100644 arch/arm64/kvm/guest.c >>> >>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/guest.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/guest.c >>> new file mode 100644 >>> index 0000000..47d3729 >>> --- /dev/null >>> +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/guest.c >>> @@ -0,0 +1,254 @@ >>> +/* >>> + * Copyright (C) 2012,2013 - ARM Ltd >>> + * Author: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@xxxxxxx> >>> + * >>> + * Derived from arch/arm/kvm/guest.c: >>> + * Copyright (C) 2012 - Virtual Open Systems and Columbia University >>> + * Author: Christoffer Dall <c.dall@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>> + * >>> + * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify >>> + * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 2 as >>> + * published by the Free Software Foundation. >>> + * >>> + * This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, >>> + * but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of >>> + * MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the >>> + * GNU General Public License for more details. >>> + * >>> + * You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License >>> + * along with this program. If not, see <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/>. >>> + */ >>> + >>> +#include <linux/errno.h> >>> +#include <linux/err.h> >>> +#include <linux/kvm_host.h> >>> +#include <linux/module.h> >>> +#include <linux/vmalloc.h> >>> +#include <linux/fs.h> >>> +#include <asm/cputype.h> >>> +#include <asm/uaccess.h> >>> +#include <asm/kvm.h> >>> +#include <asm/kvm_asm.h> >>> +#include <asm/kvm_emulate.h> >>> +#include <asm/kvm_coproc.h> >>> + >>> +struct kvm_stats_debugfs_item debugfs_entries[] = { >>> + { NULL } >>> +}; >>> + >>> +int kvm_arch_vcpu_setup(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) >>> +{ >>> + vcpu->arch.hcr_el2 = HCR_GUEST_FLAGS; >>> + return 0; >>> +} >>> + >>> +static u64 core_reg_offset_from_id(u64 id) >>> +{ >>> + return id & ~(KVM_REG_ARCH_MASK | KVM_REG_SIZE_MASK | KVM_REG_ARM_CORE); >>> +} >>> + >>> +static int get_core_reg(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, const struct kvm_one_reg *reg) >>> +{ >>> + __u32 __user *uaddr = (__u32 __user *)(unsigned long)reg->addr; >>> + struct kvm_regs *regs = vcpu_gp_regs(vcpu); >>> + int nr_regs = sizeof(*regs) / sizeof(__u32); >> >> eh, arent' your regs 64 bit? Or are you 32-bit indexing into a 64-bit >> structure? If so, this needs to be described in a big fat comment >> somewhere, which I couldn't even see looking forward in the patch series >> for the documentation part. > > As you noticed below, we have a mix of 32/64/128bit fields there. The > index is indeed on 32bit boundary. > >> Seems to me you'd want to remove the fp_regs from the core regs and just >> use a 64-bit indexing and have a separate category for the fp stuff... > > Hell no! ;-) easy now > > FP is mandatory on arm64, and I'm not going down the road of having > separate structures for that. 32bit has historical baggage to deal with, > but not arm64. > > This is the register set, and if the ONE_REG API is too cumbersome to > deal with it, then lets change ONE_REG instead (yes, I can run faster > than you think... ;-). > You chose yourself how to use the fields in ONE_REG, and that's what I think makes this code a little weird, I don't care that much how the underlying structure is. The fact that we (Rusty) used the index into the 32 bit fields was simply that it was more convenient and quite unambiguous on the 32-bit side, as opposed to defining in the API document a specific ID for each register, like the PPC stuff does. You don't have to follow that on arm64 if it doesn't make sense. Notice that in the documentation on arm32 (although it had errors in there) we explicitly specify that all sizes must be 32 bit, so you need to change that to indicate that it's a variable size and they use a 32 bit index into variably sized elements, which I think is a super funky interface, or change it to split it up into more sane categories and map that onto your internal data structure. >>> + u32 off; >>> + >>> + /* Our ID is an index into the kvm_regs struct. */ >>> + off = core_reg_offset_from_id(reg->id); >>> + if (off >= nr_regs || >>> + (off + (KVM_REG_SIZE(reg->id) / sizeof(__u32))) >= nr_regs) >> >> According to your documentation you will always save/restore 32-bit >> registers here, so the desijunction shouldn't be necessary, nor will it >> be if you just base everything on 64-bit here. > > No. Your *offset* is a 32bit index. The size can be anything, and you > want to make sure you don't read/write past the kvm_regs structure. > I see why you need it as things stand now, my point is that if the interface definition was different you probably don't need it. >>> + return -ENOENT; >>> + >>> + if (copy_to_user(uaddr, ((u32 *)regs) + off, KVM_REG_SIZE(reg->id))) >>> + return -EFAULT; >>> + >>> + return 0; >>> +} >>> + >>> +static int set_core_reg(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, const struct kvm_one_reg *reg) >>> +{ >>> + __u32 __user *uaddr = (__u32 __user *)(unsigned long)reg->addr; >>> + struct kvm_regs *regs = vcpu_gp_regs(vcpu); >>> + int nr_regs = sizeof(*regs) / sizeof(__u32); >> >> same concern here > > Same answer. > >> >>> + void *valp; >>> + u64 off; >>> + int err = 0; >>> + >>> + /* Our ID is an index into the kvm_regs struct. */ >>> + off = core_reg_offset_from_id(reg->id); >>> + if (off >= nr_regs || >>> + (off + (KVM_REG_SIZE(reg->id) / sizeof(__u32))) >= nr_regs) >>> + return -ENOENT; >>> + >>> + valp = kmalloc(KVM_REG_SIZE(reg->id), GFP_KERNEL); >>> + if (!valp) >>> + return -ENOMEM; >> >> Why are you dynamically allocating this? Do you ever have anything >> larger than a 64 bit core register? Just put that on the stack. > > Look at what a ONE_REG access can be: up to 1kB. I'm not allocating that > on the stack. > Of course not, but you don't have 1KB registers do you? You probably don't want user space accessing your 64 bit regs with a 1KB size, 128 bits should be allocatable on the stack. >>> + >>> + if (copy_from_user(valp, uaddr, KVM_REG_SIZE(reg->id))) { >>> + err = -EFAULT; >>> + goto out; >>> + } >>> + >>> + if (off == KVM_REG_ARM_CORE_REG(regs.pstate)) { >>> + unsigned long mode = (*(unsigned long *)valp) & COMPAT_PSR_MODE_MASK; >>> + switch (mode) { >>> + case PSR_MODE_EL0t: >>> + case PSR_MODE_EL1t: >>> + case PSR_MODE_EL1h: >>> + break; >>> + default: >>> + err = -EINVAL; >>> + goto out; >>> + } >>> + } >>> + >>> + memcpy((u32 *)regs + off, valp, KVM_REG_SIZE(reg->id)); >>> +out: >>> + kfree(valp); >>> + return err; >>> +} >>> + >>> +int kvm_arch_vcpu_ioctl_get_regs(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct kvm_regs *regs) >>> +{ >>> + return -EINVAL; >>> +} >>> + >>> +int kvm_arch_vcpu_ioctl_set_regs(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct kvm_regs *regs) >>> +{ >>> + return -EINVAL; >>> +} >>> + >>> +static unsigned long num_core_regs(void) >>> +{ >>> + return sizeof(struct kvm_regs) / sizeof(unsigned long); >>> +} >>> + >>> +/** >>> + * kvm_arm_num_regs - how many registers do we present via KVM_GET_ONE_REG >>> + * >>> + * This is for all registers. >>> + */ >>> +unsigned long kvm_arm_num_regs(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) >>> +{ >>> + return num_core_regs() + kvm_arm_num_sys_reg_descs(vcpu); >>> +} >>> + >>> +/** >>> + * kvm_arm_copy_reg_indices - get indices of all registers. >>> + * >>> + * We do core registers right here, then we apppend system regs. >>> + */ >>> +int kvm_arm_copy_reg_indices(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 __user *uindices) >>> +{ >>> + unsigned int i; >>> + const u64 core_reg = KVM_REG_ARM64 | KVM_REG_SIZE_U64 | KVM_REG_ARM_CORE; >>> + >>> + for (i = 0; i < sizeof(struct kvm_regs)/sizeof(unsigned long); i++) { >> >> nit: spaces around the division >> nit: the kvm_regs struct uses __u64, so would be slightly more coherent >> to use that for the sizeof(...) as well > > Actually, it should be __u32, as that is an index into the kvm_regs > structure. > again, I can only repeat that I think this all becomes quite unintuitive. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
