From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A4EE4C433E0 for ; Sat, 23 Jan 2021 14:09:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6683C22CA1 for ; Sat, 23 Jan 2021 14:09:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1725994AbhAWOIq (ORCPT ); Sat, 23 Jan 2021 09:08:46 -0500 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:33512 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725889AbhAWOIj (ORCPT ); Sat, 23 Jan 2021 09:08:39 -0500 Received: by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2961022B51; Sat, 23 Jan 2021 14:07:56 +0000 (UTC) Date: Sat, 23 Jan 2021 14:07:53 +0000 From: Catalin Marinas To: Marc Zyngier Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Will Deacon , Mark Rutland , David Brazdil , Alexandru Elisei , Ard Biesheuvel , Jing Zhang , Ajay Patil , Prasad Sodagudi , Srinivas Ramana , James Morse , Julien Thierry , Suzuki K Poulose , kernel-team@android.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 14/21] arm64: Honor VHE being disabled from the command-line Message-ID: References: <20210118094533.2874082-1-maz@kernel.org> <20210118094533.2874082-15-maz@kernel.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20210118094533.2874082-15-maz@kernel.org> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 09:45:26AM +0000, Marc Zyngier wrote: > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/hyp-stub.S b/arch/arm64/kernel/hyp-stub.S > index 59820f9b8522..bbab2148a2a2 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/hyp-stub.S > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/hyp-stub.S > @@ -77,13 +77,24 @@ SYM_CODE_END(el1_sync) > SYM_CODE_START_LOCAL(mutate_to_vhe) > // Sanity check: MMU *must* be off > mrs x0, sctlr_el2 > - tbnz x0, #0, 1f > + tbnz x0, #0, 2f > > // Needs to be VHE capable, obviously > mrs x0, id_aa64mmfr1_el1 > ubfx x0, x0, #ID_AA64MMFR1_VHE_SHIFT, #4 > - cbz x0, 1f > + cbz x0, 2f > > + // Check whether VHE is disabled from the command line > + adr_l x1, id_aa64mmfr1_val > + ldr x0, [x1] > + adr_l x1, id_aa64mmfr1_mask > + ldr x1, [x1] > + ubfx x0, x0, #ID_AA64MMFR1_VHE_SHIFT, #4 > + ubfx x1, x1, #ID_AA64MMFR1_VHE_SHIFT, #4 > + cbz x1, 1f > + and x0, x0, x1 > + cbz x0, 2f > +1: I can see the advantage here in separate id_aa64mmfr1_val/mask but we could use some asm offsets here and keep the pointer indirection simpler in C code. You'd just need something like 'adr_l mmfr1_ovrd + VAL_OFFSET'. Anyway, if you have a strong preference for the current approach, leave it as is. -- Catalin