lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Aug]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH v3 07/10] KVM: arm64: Provide a PV_TIME device to user space
From
Date
On 22/08/2019 11:57, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Aug 2019 16:36:53 +0100
> Steven Price <steven.price@arm.com> wrote:
>
>> Allow user space to inform the KVM host where in the physical memory
>> map the paravirtualized time structures should be located.
>>
>> A device is created which provides the base address of an array of
>> Stolen Time (ST) structures, one for each VCPU. There must be (64 *
>> total number of VCPUs) bytes of memory available at this location.
>>
>> The address is given in terms of the physical address visible to
>> the guest and must be page aligned. The guest will discover the address
>> via a hypercall.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Steven Price <steven.price@arm.com>
>
> Hi Steven,
>
> One general question inline. I'm not particularly familiar with this area
> of the kernel, so maybe I'm missing something obvious, but having
> .destroy free the kvm_device which wasn't created in .create seems
> 'unusual'.
>
> Otherwise, FWIW looks good to me.
>
> Jonathan
>
[...]
>> +static void kvm_arm_pvtime_destroy(struct kvm_device *dev)
>> +{
>> + struct kvm_arch_pvtime *pvtime = &dev->kvm->arch.pvtime;
>> +
>> + pvtime->st_base = GPA_INVALID;
>> + kfree(dev);
>
> Nothing to do with your patch as such... All users do the same.
>
> This seems miss balanced. Why do we need to free the device by hand
> when we didn't create it in the create function? I appreciate
> the comments say this is needed, but as far as I can see every
> single callback does kfree(dev) at the end which seems an
> odd thing to do.

Yes I think this is odd too - indeed when I initially wrote this I
missed off the kfree() call and had to track down the memory leak.

When I looked into potentially tiding this up I found some other
oddities, e.g. "kvm-xive" (arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_xive.c) doesn't have
a destroy callback. But I can't see anything in the common code which
deals with that case. So I decided to just "go with the flow" at the
moment, since I don't understand how some of these existing devices work
(perhaps they are already broken?).

Steve

>> +}
>> +
>> +static int kvm_arm_pvtime_set_attr(struct kvm_device *dev,
>> + struct kvm_device_attr *attr)
>> +{
>> + struct kvm *kvm = dev->kvm;
>> + struct kvm_arch_pvtime *pvtime = &kvm->arch.pvtime;
>> + u64 __user *user = (u64 __user *)attr->addr;
>> + struct kvm_dev_arm_st_region region;
>> +
>> + switch (attr->group) {
>> + case KVM_DEV_ARM_PV_TIME_REGION:
>> + if (copy_from_user(&region, user, sizeof(region)))
>> + return -EFAULT;
>> + if (region.gpa & ~PAGE_MASK)
>> + return -EINVAL;
>> + if (region.size & ~PAGE_MASK)
>> + return -EINVAL;
>> + switch (attr->attr) {
>> + case KVM_DEV_ARM_PV_TIME_ST:
>> + if (pvtime->st_base != GPA_INVALID)
>> + return -EEXIST;
>> + pvtime->st_base = region.gpa;
>> + pvtime->st_size = region.size;
>> + return 0;
>> + }
>> + break;
>> + }
>> + return -ENXIO;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static int kvm_arm_pvtime_get_attr(struct kvm_device *dev,
>> + struct kvm_device_attr *attr)
>> +{
>> + struct kvm_arch_pvtime *pvtime = &dev->kvm->arch.pvtime;
>> + u64 __user *user = (u64 __user *)attr->addr;
>> + struct kvm_dev_arm_st_region region;
>> +
>> + switch (attr->group) {
>> + case KVM_DEV_ARM_PV_TIME_REGION:
>> + switch (attr->attr) {
>> + case KVM_DEV_ARM_PV_TIME_ST:
>> + region.gpa = pvtime->st_base;
>> + region.size = pvtime->st_size;
>> + if (copy_to_user(user, &region, sizeof(region)))
>> + return -EFAULT;
>> + return 0;
>> + }
>> + break;
>> + }
>> + return -ENXIO;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static int kvm_arm_pvtime_has_attr(struct kvm_device *dev,
>> + struct kvm_device_attr *attr)
>> +{
>> + switch (attr->group) {
>> + case KVM_DEV_ARM_PV_TIME_REGION:
>> + switch (attr->attr) {
>> + case KVM_DEV_ARM_PV_TIME_ST:
>> + return 0;
>> + }
>> + break;
>> + }
>> + return -ENXIO;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static const struct kvm_device_ops pvtime_ops = {
>> + "Arm PV time",
>> + .create = kvm_arm_pvtime_create,
>> + .destroy = kvm_arm_pvtime_destroy,
>> + .set_attr = kvm_arm_pvtime_set_attr,
>> + .get_attr = kvm_arm_pvtime_get_attr,
>> + .has_attr = kvm_arm_pvtime_has_attr
>> +};
>> +
>> +void kvm_pvtime_init(void)
>> +{
>> + kvm_register_device_ops(&pvtime_ops, KVM_DEV_TYPE_ARM_PV_TIME);
>> +}
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> linux-arm-kernel mailing list
> linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
>

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-08-22 13:13    [W:0.107 / U:1.164 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site