[PATCH] KVM: arm64: Fix section mismatches around hyp_cpu_pm_{init, exit}

Commit fa8c3d65538a ("KVM: arm64: Keep nVHE EL2 vector installed") inadvertently changed clang's inlining decisions around hyp_cpu_pm_{init,exit}, causing the following section mismatch warnings: WARNING: modpost: vmlinux.o(.text+0x95c6c): Section mismatch in reference from the function

Re: [PATCH] KVM: arm64: Fix section mismatches around hyp_cpu_pm_{init,exit}

On 2020-12-29 21:43, Nathan Chancellor wrote: Commit fa8c3d65538a ("KVM: arm64: Keep nVHE EL2 vector installed") inadvertently changed clang's inlining decisions around hyp_cpu_pm_{init,exit}, causing the following section mismatch warnings: WARNING: modpost: vmlinux.o(.text+0x95c6c): Section

[PATCH] KVM: arm64: Allow PSCI SYSTEM_OFF/RESET to return

The KVM/arm64 PSCI relay assumes that SYSTEM_OFF and SYSTEM_RESET should not return, as dictated by the PSCI spec. However, there is firmware out there which breaks this assumption, leading to a hyp panic. Make KVM more robust to broken firmware by allowing these to return. Signed-off-by: David

Re: [PATCH 00/17] arm64: Early CPU feature override, and an application to VHE

On 2020-12-28 10:49, Marc Zyngier wrote: It recently came to light that there is a need to be able to override some CPU features very early on, before the kernel is fully up and running. The reasons for this range from specific feature support (such as using Protected KVM on VHE HW, which is the

Re: [PATCH] KVM: arm64: Allow PSCI SYSTEM_OFF/RESET to return

Hi David, On 2020-12-29 16:00, David Brazdil wrote: The KVM/arm64 PSCI relay assumes that SYSTEM_OFF and SYSTEM_RESET should not return, as dictated by the PSCI spec. However, there is firmware out there which breaks this assumption, leading to a hyp panic. Make KVM more robust to broken

Re: [PATCH] KVM: arm64: Allow PSCI SYSTEM_OFF/RESET to return

On Tue, Dec 29, 2020 at 04:00:59PM +, David Brazdil wrote: > The KVM/arm64 PSCI relay assumes that SYSTEM_OFF and SYSTEM_RESET should > not return, as dictated by the PSCI spec. However, there is firmware out > there which breaks this assumption, leading to a hyp panic. Make KVM > more robust

Re: [PATCH v2 0/6] KVM: arm64: VCPU preempted check support

On 2020/1/15 22:14, Marc Zyngier wrote: > On 2020-01-13 12:12, Will Deacon wrote: >> [+PeterZ] >> >> On Thu, Dec 26, 2019 at 09:58:27PM +0800, Zengruan Ye wrote: >>> This patch set aims to support the vcpu_is_preempted() functionality >>> under KVM/arm64, which allowing the guest to obtain the