lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2022]   [Dec]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRE: [PATCH v1] KVM: x86: add KVM_CAP_DEVICE_CTRL
Date
On Saturday, December 17, 2022 1:13 AM, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> Rather than hardcode this in x86, I think it would be better to add an #ifdef'd
> version in the generic check. E.g. if MIPS or RISC-V ever gains KVM_VFIO
> support then they'll need to enumerate KVM_CAP_DEVICE_CTRL too, and odds
> are we'll forget to to do.
>
> diff --git a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c index
> 13e88297f999..f70b9cea95d9 100644
> --- a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
> +++ b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
> @@ -4525,6 +4525,10 @@ static long
> kvm_vm_ioctl_check_extension_generic(struct kvm *kvm, long arg)
> case KVM_CAP_BINARY_STATS_FD:
> case KVM_CAP_SYSTEM_EVENT_DATA:
> return 1;
> +#ifdef CONFIG_KVM_VFIO
> + case KVM_CAP_DEVICE_CTRL:
> + return 1;
> +#endif
> default:
> break;
> }
>
> The other potentially bad idea would be to detect the presence of a
> device_ops and delete all of the arch hooks, e.g.
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/arm.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/arm.c index
> 9c5573bc4614..190e9c3b10a7 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/arm.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/arm.c
> @@ -212,7 +212,6 @@ int kvm_vm_ioctl_check_extension(struct kvm *kvm,
> long ext)
> r = vgic_present;
> break;
> case KVM_CAP_IOEVENTFD:
> - case KVM_CAP_DEVICE_CTRL:
> case KVM_CAP_USER_MEMORY:
> case KVM_CAP_SYNC_MMU:
> case KVM_CAP_DESTROY_MEMORY_REGION_WORKS:
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kvm/powerpc.c b/arch/powerpc/kvm/powerpc.c
> index 04494a4fb37a..21f9fbe96f6a 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/kvm/powerpc.c
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/kvm/powerpc.c
> @@ -541,7 +541,6 @@ int kvm_vm_ioctl_check_extension(struct kvm *kvm,
> long ext)
> case KVM_CAP_ENABLE_CAP:
> case KVM_CAP_ONE_REG:
> case KVM_CAP_IOEVENTFD:
> - case KVM_CAP_DEVICE_CTRL:
> case KVM_CAP_IMMEDIATE_EXIT:
> case KVM_CAP_SET_GUEST_DEBUG:
> r = 1;
> diff --git a/arch/riscv/kvm/vm.c b/arch/riscv/kvm/vm.c index
> 65a964d7e70d..6efe93b282e1 100644
> --- a/arch/riscv/kvm/vm.c
> +++ b/arch/riscv/kvm/vm.c
> @@ -57,7 +57,6 @@ int kvm_vm_ioctl_check_extension(struct kvm *kvm,
> long ext)
>
> switch (ext) {
> case KVM_CAP_IOEVENTFD:
> - case KVM_CAP_DEVICE_CTRL:
> case KVM_CAP_USER_MEMORY:
> case KVM_CAP_SYNC_MMU:
> case KVM_CAP_DESTROY_MEMORY_REGION_WORKS:
> diff --git a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c index
> e4890e04b210..191d220b6a30 100644
> --- a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
> +++ b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
> @@ -567,7 +567,6 @@ int kvm_vm_ioctl_check_extension(struct kvm *kvm,
> long ext)
> case KVM_CAP_ENABLE_CAP:
> case KVM_CAP_S390_CSS_SUPPORT:
> case KVM_CAP_IOEVENTFD:
> - case KVM_CAP_DEVICE_CTRL:
> case KVM_CAP_S390_IRQCHIP:
> case KVM_CAP_VM_ATTRIBUTES:
> case KVM_CAP_MP_STATE:
> diff --git a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c index
> 13e88297f999..99e3da9ce42d 100644
> --- a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
> +++ b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
> @@ -4525,6 +4525,15 @@ static long
> kvm_vm_ioctl_check_extension_generic(struct kvm *kvm, long arg)
> case KVM_CAP_BINARY_STATS_FD:
> case KVM_CAP_SYSTEM_EVENT_DATA:
> return 1;
> + case KVM_CAP_DEVICE_CTRL: {
> + int i;
> +
> + for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(kvm_device_ops_table); ++) {
> + if (kvm_device_ops_table[i])
> + return 1;
> + }
> + return 0;
> + }
> default:
> break;
> }

Yes, it looks better to move it to the generic check, but I'm not sure if it would be necessary to do the per-device check here either via CONFIG_KVM_VFIO (for example, if more non-arch-specific usages are added, we would end up with lots of such #ifdef to be added, which doesn't seem nice) or kvm_device_ops_table.

I think fundamentally KVM_CAP_DEVICE_CTRL is used to check if the generic kvm_device framework (e.g. KVM_CREATE_DEVICE) is supported by KVM (older KVM before 2013 doesn't have it). The per-device type (KVM_DEV_TYPE_VFIO, KVM_DEV_TYPE_ARM_PV_TIME etc.) support can be checked via KVM_CREATE_DEVICE, which reports -ENODEV if the device type doesn't have an entry in kvm_device_ops_table.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2022-12-19 14:31    [W:2.747 / U:0.052 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site