| Message ID | 20210108121524.656872-24-qperret@google.com |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
| Series | KVM/arm64: A stage 2 for the host | expand |
On Fri, Jan 08, 2021 at 12:15:21PM +0000, Quentin Perret wrote: > Refactor __populate_fault_info() to introduce __get_fault_info() which > will be used once the host is wrapped in a stage 2. > > Signed-off-by: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com> > --- > arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/include/hyp/switch.h | 36 +++++++++++++++---------- > 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/include/hyp/switch.h b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/include/hyp/switch.h > index 84473574c2e7..e9005255d639 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/include/hyp/switch.h > +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/include/hyp/switch.h > @@ -157,19 +157,9 @@ static inline bool __translate_far_to_hpfar(u64 far, u64 *hpfar) > return true; > } > > -static inline bool __populate_fault_info(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > +static inline bool __get_fault_info(u64 esr, u64 *far, u64 *hpfar) Could this take a pointer to a struct kvm_vcpu_fault_info instead? Will
On Wednesday 03 Feb 2021 at 15:58:32 (+0000), Will Deacon wrote: > On Fri, Jan 08, 2021 at 12:15:21PM +0000, Quentin Perret wrote: > > Refactor __populate_fault_info() to introduce __get_fault_info() which > > will be used once the host is wrapped in a stage 2. > > > > Signed-off-by: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com> > > --- > > arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/include/hyp/switch.h | 36 +++++++++++++++---------- > > 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/include/hyp/switch.h b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/include/hyp/switch.h > > index 84473574c2e7..e9005255d639 100644 > > --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/include/hyp/switch.h > > +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/include/hyp/switch.h > > @@ -157,19 +157,9 @@ static inline bool __translate_far_to_hpfar(u64 far, u64 *hpfar) > > return true; > > } > > > > -static inline bool __populate_fault_info(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > > +static inline bool __get_fault_info(u64 esr, u64 *far, u64 *hpfar) > > Could this take a pointer to a struct kvm_vcpu_fault_info instead? The disr_el1 field will be unused in this case, but yes, that should work. Cheers, Quentin
diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/include/hyp/switch.h b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/include/hyp/switch.h index 84473574c2e7..e9005255d639 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/include/hyp/switch.h +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/include/hyp/switch.h @@ -157,19 +157,9 @@ static inline bool __translate_far_to_hpfar(u64 far, u64 *hpfar) return true; } -static inline bool __populate_fault_info(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) +static inline bool __get_fault_info(u64 esr, u64 *far, u64 *hpfar) { - u8 ec; - u64 esr; - u64 hpfar, far; - - esr = vcpu->arch.fault.esr_el2; - ec = ESR_ELx_EC(esr); - - if (ec != ESR_ELx_EC_DABT_LOW && ec != ESR_ELx_EC_IABT_LOW) - return true; - - far = read_sysreg_el2(SYS_FAR); + *far = read_sysreg_el2(SYS_FAR); /* * The HPFAR can be invalid if the stage 2 fault did not @@ -185,12 +175,30 @@ static inline bool __populate_fault_info(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) if (!(esr & ESR_ELx_S1PTW) && (cpus_have_final_cap(ARM64_WORKAROUND_834220) || (esr & ESR_ELx_FSC_TYPE) == FSC_PERM)) { - if (!__translate_far_to_hpfar(far, &hpfar)) + if (!__translate_far_to_hpfar(*far, hpfar)) return false; } else { - hpfar = read_sysreg(hpfar_el2); + *hpfar = read_sysreg(hpfar_el2); } + return true; +} + +static inline bool __populate_fault_info(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) +{ + u8 ec; + u64 esr; + u64 hpfar, far; + + esr = vcpu->arch.fault.esr_el2; + ec = ESR_ELx_EC(esr); + + if (ec != ESR_ELx_EC_DABT_LOW && ec != ESR_ELx_EC_IABT_LOW) + return true; + + if (!__get_fault_info(esr, &far, &hpfar)) + return false; + vcpu->arch.fault.far_el2 = far; vcpu->arch.fault.hpfar_el2 = hpfar; return true;
Refactor __populate_fault_info() to introduce __get_fault_info() which will be used once the host is wrapped in a stage 2. Signed-off-by: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com> --- arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/include/hyp/switch.h | 36 +++++++++++++++---------- 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)