[lkml]   [2019]   [Dec]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH] arm64: Introduce ISAR6 CPU ID register
On Thu, Dec 12, 2019 at 03:44:23PM +0530, Anshuman Khandual wrote:
> +#define ID_ISAR6_JSCVT_SHIFT 0
> +#define ID_ISAR6_DP_SHIFT 4
> +#define ID_ISAR6_FHM_SHIFT 8
> +#define ID_ISAR6_SB_SHIFT 12
> +#define ID_ISAR6_SPECRES_SHIFT 16
> +#define ID_ISAR6_BF16_SHIFT 20
> +#define ID_ISAR6_I8MM_SHIFT 24

> @@ -399,6 +399,7 @@ static const struct __ftr_reg_entry {
> ARM64_FTR_REG(SYS_ID_ISAR4_EL1, ftr_generic_32bits),
> ARM64_FTR_REG(SYS_ID_ISAR5_EL1, ftr_id_isar5),
> ARM64_FTR_REG(SYS_ID_MMFR4_EL1, ftr_id_mmfr4),

> + ARM64_FTR_REG(SYS_ID_ISAR6_EL1, ftr_generic_32bits),

Using ftr_generic_32bits exposes the lowest-common-denominator for all
4-bit fields in the register, and I don't think that's the right thing
to do here, because:

* We have no idea what ID_ISAR6 bits [31:28] may mean in future.

* AFAICT, the instructions described by ID_ISAR6.SPECRES (from the
ARMv8.0-PredInv extension) operate on the local PE and are not
broadcast. To make those work as a guest expects, the host will need
to do additional things (e.g. to preserve that illusion when a vCPU is
migrated from one pCPU to another and back).

Given that, think we should add an explicit ftr_id_isar6 which only
exposes the fields that we're certain are safe to expose to a guest
(i.e. without SPECRES).


 \ /
  Last update: 2019-12-12 15:47    [W:0.084 / U:0.336 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site