On Sat, Jun 14, 2014 at 08:42:58AM -0700, Victor Kamensky wrote:
On 14 June 2014 08:04, Christoffer Dall christoffer.dall@linaro.org wrote:
On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 09:30:11AM -0700, Victor Kamensky wrote:
On arm64 'u32 vgic_eisr[2];' and 'u32 vgic_elrsr[2]' are accessed as one 'unsigned long *' bit fields, which has 64bit size. So we need to swap least significant word with most significant word when code reads those registers from h/w.
Signed-off-by: Victor Kamensky victor.kamensky@linaro.org
arch/arm64/kvm/hyp.S | 7 +++++++ 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp.S b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp.S index 0620691..5035b41 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp.S +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp.S @@ -415,10 +415,17 @@ CPU_BE( rev w11, w11 ) str w4, [x3, #VGIC_CPU_HCR] str w5, [x3, #VGIC_CPU_VMCR] str w6, [x3, #VGIC_CPU_MISR] +#ifndef CONFIG_CPU_BIG_ENDIAN str w7, [x3, #VGIC_CPU_EISR] str w8, [x3, #(VGIC_CPU_EISR + 4)] str w9, [x3, #VGIC_CPU_ELRSR] str w10, [x3, #(VGIC_CPU_ELRSR + 4)] +#else
str w7, [x3, #(VGIC_CPU_EISR + 4)]str w8, [x3, #VGIC_CPU_EISR]str w9, [x3, #(VGIC_CPU_ELRSR + 4)]str w10, [x3, #VGIC_CPU_ELRSR]+#endif str w11, [x3, #VGIC_CPU_APR]
/* Clear GICH_HCR */-- 1.8.1.4
I thought Marc had something here which allowed you to deal with the conversion in the accessor functions and avoid this patch?
Christoffer, I appreciate your review comments.
I think I was missing something. Yes, Marc mentioned in [1] about his new changes in vgic3 series. But just after rereading it now, I realized that he was suggesting to pick up his commits and add them to this series. Is it my right understanding that they should be [2] and [3] ... looking a bit closer to it, it seems that [4] is needed as well. I am concerned that I don't understand all dependencies and impact of those. Wondering about other way around. When vgic3 series introduced could we just back off above change and do it in new right way?
[1] https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/pipermail/kvmarm/2014-May/009618.html [2] https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/pipermail/kvmarm/2014-May/009475.html [3] https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/pipermail/kvmarm/2014-May/009472.html [4] https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/pipermail/kvmarm/2014-May/009473.html
Other question: I was testing all this directly on vanilla v3.15, should I use some other armkvm specific integration branch to make sure it works with all other in a queue armkvm changes.
In mean time I will try to pick up [4], [2], and [3] into v3.15 and see how it goes.
ok, thanks. I'm ok with potentially adjusting this later if it turns out to be a pain, depends on what Marc says.
I can probably fix up any conflicts when I apply the patches, but I do appreciate getting patches that apply to the next branch in [1]. (But wait until the next branch merges 3.16-rc1).
-Christoffer
[1]: https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/kvmarm/kvmarm.git/