Messages in this thread | | | From | Miguel Luis <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v4 2/3] arm64: Add missing _EL2 encodings | Date | Thu, 19 Oct 2023 13:23:09 +0000 |
| |
Hi Marc,
> On 19 Oct 2023, at 11:39, Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org> wrote: > > On Mon, 16 Oct 2023 12:17:41 +0100, > Miguel Luis <miguel.luis@oracle.com> wrote: >> >> Some _EL2 encodings are missing. Add them. >> >> Signed-off-by: Miguel Luis <miguel.luis@oracle.com> >> --- >> arch/arm64/include/asm/sysreg.h | 39 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/sysreg.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/sysreg.h >> index ba5db50effec..8653fb67a339 100644 >> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/sysreg.h >> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/sysreg.h > > [...] > >> +#define SYS_SDER32_EL2 sys_reg(3, 4, 1, 3, 1) > > [...] > >> +#define SYS_VSTTBR_EL2 sys_reg(3, 4, 2, 6, 0) >> +#define SYS_VSTCR_EL2 sys_reg(3, 4, 2, 6, 2) > > [...] > >> +#define SYS_CNTHVS_TVAL_EL2 sys_reg(3, 4, 14, 4, 0) >> +#define SYS_CNTHVS_CTL_EL2 sys_reg(3, 4, 14, 4, 1) >> +#define SYS_CNTHVS_CVAL_EL2 sys_reg(3, 4, 14, 4, 2) >> +#define SYS_CNTHPS_TVAL_EL2 sys_reg(3, 4, 14, 5, 0) >> +#define SYS_CNTHPS_CTL_EL2 sys_reg(3, 4, 14, 5, 1) >> +#define SYS_CNTHPS_CVAL_EL2 sys_reg(3, 4, 14, 5, 2) > > While the secure definitions seem correct, what is the rationale > behind their presence here? They cannot be trapped from non-secure, > and the pseudocode is pretty explicit: > > if !IsCurrentSecurityState(SS_Secure) then > UNDEFINED; > > Given that, they cannot be trapped, handled or accessed from a KVM > guest, as Linux on arm64 *always* runs non-secure. >
Thank you for clarifying.
Those definitions were needed for the refinement on patch 3 which clearly didn’t considered that statement beforehand.
Yet, should we keep them here so they could be used?
Thank you Miguel
> M. > > -- > Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.
| |