Hi Marc,
On 28/05/2020 09:57, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On 2020-05-26 17:18, James Morse wrote:
>> access_csselr() uses the 32bit r->reg value to access the 64bit array,
>> so reads and write the wrong value. sys_regs[4], is ACTLR_EL1, which
>> is subsequently save/restored when we enter the guest.
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c
>> index 51db934702b6..2eda539f3281 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c
>> @@ -2060,7 +2060,7 @@ static const struct sys_reg_desc cp15_regs[] = {
>>
>> { Op1(1), CRn( 0), CRm( 0), Op2(0), access_ccsidr },
>> { Op1(1), CRn( 0), CRm( 0), Op2(1), access_clidr },
>> - { Op1(2), CRn( 0), CRm( 0), Op2(0), access_csselr, NULL, c0_CSSELR },
>> + { Op1(2), CRn( 0), CRm( 0), Op2(0), access_csselr_el1, NULL, CSSELR_EL1 },
>> };
> This is a departure from the way we deal with 32bit CP15 registers.
> We deal with this exact issue in a very different way for other
> CP15 regs, by adjusting the index in the sys_regs array (see the
> way we handle the VM regs).
>
> How about something like this (untested):
[like access_vm_reg() does]
Sure, I'll give that a test and re-post it.
> Ideally, I'd like the core sys_reg code to deal with this sort
> of funnies, but I'm trying to keep the change minimal...
Roll this '/2' and upper/lower bits stuff into a vcpu_write_cp15_reg() that calls
vcpu_write_sys_reg()? (/me hunts out the todo list)
Thanks,
James
