lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2021]   [Feb]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v6 06/21] arm64: Move VHE-specific SPE setup to mutate_to_vhe()
Hi Marc,

On Mon, Feb 01, 2021 at 11:56:22AM +0000, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> There isn't much that a VHE kernel needs on top of whatever has
> been done for nVHE, so let's move the little we need to the
> VHE stub (the SPE setup), and drop the init_el2_state macro.
>
> No expected functional change.
>
> Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
> Acked-by: David Brazdil <dbrazdil@google.com>
> Acked-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
> ---
> arch/arm64/kernel/hyp-stub.S | 28 +++++++++++++++++++++++++---
> 1 file changed, 25 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/hyp-stub.S b/arch/arm64/kernel/hyp-stub.S
> index 373ed2213e1d..6b5c73cf9d52 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/hyp-stub.S
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/hyp-stub.S
> @@ -92,9 +92,6 @@ SYM_CODE_START_LOCAL(mutate_to_vhe)
> msr hcr_el2, x0
> isb
>
> - // Doesn't do much on VHE, but still, worth a shot
> - init_el2_state vhe
> -
> // Use the EL1 allocated stack, per-cpu offset
> mrs x0, sp_el1
> mov sp, x0
> @@ -107,6 +104,31 @@ SYM_CODE_START_LOCAL(mutate_to_vhe)
> mrs_s x0, SYS_VBAR_EL12
> msr vbar_el1, x0
>
> + // Fixup SPE configuration, if supported...
> + mrs x1, id_aa64dfr0_el1
> + ubfx x1, x1, #ID_AA64DFR0_PMSVER_SHIFT, #4
> + mov x2, xzr
> + cbz x1, skip_spe
> +
> + // ... and not owned by EL3
> + mrs_s x0, SYS_PMBIDR_EL1
> + and x0, x0, #(1 << SYS_PMBIDR_EL1_P_SHIFT)
> + cbnz x0, skip_spe
> +
> + // Let the SPE driver in control of the sampling
> + mrs_s x0, SYS_PMSCR_EL1
> + bic x0, x0, #(1 << SYS_PMSCR_EL2_PCT_SHIFT)
> + bic x0, x0, #(1 << SYS_PMSCR_EL2_PA_SHIFT)
> + msr_s SYS_PMSCR_EL1, x0

Why do we need to touch pmscr_el1 at all? The SPE driver should take care of
that, no? If you drop the pmscr_el1 accesses, I think you can drop the
pmbidr_el1 check as well. And actually, then why even check dfr0? Doing the
bic for the mdcr_el1.e2pb bits is harmless.

> + mov x2, #MDCR_EL2_TPMS
> +
> +skip_spe:
> + // For VHE, use EL2 translation and disable access from EL1
> + mrs x0, mdcr_el2
> + bic x0, x0, #(MDCR_EL2_E2PB_MASK << MDCR_EL2_E2PB_SHIFT)
> + orr x0, x0, x2
> + msr mdcr_el2, x0

Doesn't this undo the setting of mdcr_el2.hpmn if SPE is not present or
unavailable? (This wouldn't be an issue if we removed the skip_spe paths
altogether).

Will

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2021-02-03 22:14    [W:0.482 / U:1.220 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site