On 02/03/16 09:08, Marc Zyngier wrote:
On 25/02/16 09:52, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
Add a check to make sure the system supports AArch32 state
before initialising a 32bit guest.
Cc: Christoffer Dall <christoffer.d...@linaro.org>
Cc: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyng...@arm.com>
Cc: kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu
Signed-off-by: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poul...@arm.com>
...
@@ -338,6 +340,12 @@ static inline void kvm_arch_sync_events(struct kvm *kvm) {}
static inline void kvm_arch_vcpu_uninit(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) {}
static inline void kvm_arch_sched_in(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, int cpu) {}
+static inline bool kvm_arch_vcpu_validate_features(struct kvm_vcpu_arch
*arch_vcpu)
+{
+ return !test_bit(KVM_ARM_VCPU_EL1_32BIT, arch_vcpu->features) ||
+ system_supports_32bit_el0();
+}
+
This is really convoluted (it took me 5 minutes staring at the
expression and remembering that AArch32 EL1 implies AArch32 EL0 to get it).
Now, we already have kvm_reset_vcpu() that validates AArch32 support. It
would probably be better to move things there. Thoughts?
I think we can leave the kvm bits as it is now, discarding this patch, as
we already do the right thing. Also system_supports_32bit_el0() doesn't
guarantee system_supports_32bit_el1(). The negation and converse are
both true though.
i.e,
!32bit_el0_support => !32bit_el1_support
&
32bit_el1_support => 32bit_el0_support
Thanks
Suzuki
_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
