On 13/10/17 15:15, Dave Martin wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 12:28:32PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>> On 12/10/17 12:04, Dave Martin wrote:
>>> On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 05:28:06PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>>>> [+ Christoffer]
>>>>
>>>> On 10/10/17 19:38, Dave Martin wrote:
>>>>> Until KVM has full SVE support, guests must not be allowed to
>>>>> execute SVE instructions.
>>>>>
>>>>> This patch enables the necessary traps, and also ensures that the
>>>>> traps are disabled again on exit from the guest so that the host
>>>>> can still use SVE if it wants to.
>>>>>
>>>>> This patch introduces another instance of
>>>>> __this_cpu_write(fpsimd_last_state, NULL), so this flush operation
>>>>> is abstracted out as a separate helper fpsimd_flush_cpu_state().
>>>>> Other instances are ported appropriately.
>>>>>
>>>>> As a side effect of this refactoring, a this_cpu_write() in
>>>>> fpsimd_cpu_pm_notifier() is changed to __this_cpu_write(). This
>>>>> should be fine, since cpu_pm_enter() is supposed to be called only
>>>>> with interrupts disabled.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@xxxxxxx>
>>>>> Reviewed-by: Alex Bennée <alex.bennee@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>> Cc: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@xxxxxxx>
>>>>> Cc: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>> ---
>>>
>>> [...]
>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h
>>>>> index e923b58..674912d 100644
>>>>> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h
>>>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h
>>>
>>> [...]
>>>
>>>>> @@ -384,4 +385,14 @@ static inline void __cpu_init_stage2(void)
>>>
>>> [...]
>>>
>>>>> +static inline void kvm_fpsimd_flush_cpu_state(void)
>>>>> +{
>>>>> + if (system_supports_sve())
>>>>> + sve_flush_cpu_state();
>>>>
>>>> Hmmm. How does this work if...
>>>
>>> !IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ARM64_SVE) implies !system_supports_sve(), so
>>> if CONFIG_ARM64_SVE is not set, the call is optimised away.
>>>
>>> [...]
>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/fpsimd.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/fpsimd.c
>>>>> index a9cb794..6ae3703 100644
>>>>> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/fpsimd.c
>>>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/fpsimd.c
>>>>> @@ -1073,6 +1073,33 @@ void fpsimd_flush_task_state(struct task_struct *t)
>>>
>>> [...]
>>>
>>>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_ARM64_SVE
>>>>> +void sve_flush_cpu_state(void)
>>>>> +{
>>>>> + struct fpsimd_state *const fpstate = __this_cpu_read(fpsimd_last_state);
>>>>> + struct task_struct *tsk;
>>>>> +
>>>>> + if (!fpstate)
>>>>> + return;
>>>>> +
>>>>> + tsk = container_of(fpstate, struct task_struct, thread.fpsimd_state);
>>>>> + if (test_tsk_thread_flag(tsk, TIF_SVE))
>>>>> + fpsimd_flush_cpu_state();
>>>>> +}
>>>>> +#endif /* CONFIG_ARM64_SVE */
>>>>
>>>> ... CONFIG_ARM64_SVE is not set? Fixing this should just be a matter of
>>>> moving the #ifdef/#endif inside the function...
>>>
>>> Because sve_flush_cpu_state() is not in the same compilation unit it
>>> can't be static, and that means the compiler won't remove it
>>> automatically if it's unused -- hence the #ifdef.
>>>
>>> Because the call site is optimised away, there is no link failure.
>>>
>>> Don't we rely on this sort of thing all over the place?
>> Dunno. It just feels weird. But if you are sure that it won't break,
>> fine by me. I guess we'll find out pretty quickly how this fares,
>> specially with older toolchains.
>
> I thought this was why the kernel doesn't support building with -O0.
> There are many instances of this in the series, not just here.
>
> Let me know if you feel this isn't good enough though.
That's OK to me. As I said, we'll find out pretty quickly if anything
breaks unexpectedly.
> Do you have any other comments on this patch?
None. You can add my:
Acked-by: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@xxxxxxx>
M.
--
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...
