KVM: arm64: Add LR overflow handling documentation

Add a bit of documentation describing how we are dealing with LR
overflow. This is mostly a braindump of how things are expected
to work. For now anyway.

Tested-by: Fuad Tabba <tabba@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
Tested-by: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
Link: https://msgid.link/20251120172540.2267180-10-maz@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Oliver Upton <oupton@kernel.org>
This commit is contained in:
Marc Zyngier 2025-11-20 17:24:59 +00:00 committed by Oliver Upton
parent 879a7fd4fd
commit 0dc433e79a

View File

@ -825,7 +825,86 @@ static int compute_ap_list_depth(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
return count;
}
/* Requires the VCPU's ap_list_lock to be held. */
/*
* Dealing with LR overflow is close to black magic -- dress accordingly.
*
* We have to present an almost infinite number of interrupts through a very
* limited number of registers. Therefore crucial decisions must be made to
* ensure we feed the most relevant interrupts into the LRs, and yet have
* some facilities to let the guest interact with those that are not there.
*
* All considerations below are in the context of interrupts targeting a
* single vcpu with non-idle state (either pending, active, or both),
* colloquially called the ap_list:
*
* - Pending interrupts must have priority over active interrupts. This also
* excludes pending+active interrupts. This ensures that a guest can
* perform priority drops on any number of interrupts, and yet be
* presented the next pending one.
*
* - Deactivation of interrupts outside of the LRs must be tracked by using
* either the EOIcount-driven maintenance interrupt, and sometimes by
* trapping the DIR register.
*
* - For EOImode=0, a non-zero EOIcount means walking the ap_list past the
* point that made it into the LRs, and deactivate interrupts that would
* have made it onto the LRs if we had the space.
*
* - The MI-generation bits must be used to try and force an exit when the
* guest has done enough changes to the LRs that we want to reevaluate the
* situation:
*
* - if the total number of pending interrupts exceeds the number of
* LR, NPIE must be set in order to exit once no pending interrupts
* are present in the LRs, allowing us to populate the next batch.
*
* - if there are active interrupts outside of the LRs, then LRENPIE
* must be set so that we exit on deactivation of one of these, and
* work out which one is to be deactivated. Note that this is not
* enough to deal with EOImode=1, see below.
*
* - if the overall number of interrupts exceeds the number of LRs,
* then UIE must be set to allow refilling of the LRs once the
* majority of them has been processed.
*
* - as usual, MI triggers are only an optimisation, since we cannot
* rely on the MI being delivered in timely manner...
*
* - EOImode=1 creates some additional problems:
*
* - deactivation can happen in any order, and we cannot rely on
* EOImode=0's coupling of priority-drop and deactivation which
* imposes strict reverse Ack order. This means that DIR must
* trap if we have active interrupts outside of the LRs.
*
* - deactivation of SPIs can occur on any CPU, while the SPI is only
* present in the ap_list of the CPU that actually ack-ed it. In that
* case, EOIcount doesn't provide enough information, and we must
* resort to trapping DIR even if we don't overflow the LRs. Bonus
* point for not trapping DIR when no SPIs are pending or active in
* the whole VM.
*
* - LPIs do not suffer the same problem as SPIs on deactivation, as we
* have to essentially discard the active state, see below.
*
* - Virtual LPIs have an active state (surprise!), which gets removed on
* priority drop (EOI). However, EOIcount doesn't get bumped when the LPI
* is not present in the LR (surprise again!). Special care must therefore
* be taken to remove the active state from any activated LPI when exiting
* from the guest. This is in a way no different from what happens on the
* physical side. We still rely on the running priority to have been
* removed from the APRs, irrespective of the LPI being present in the LRs
* or not.
*
* - Virtual SGIs directly injected via GICv4.1 must not affect EOIcount, as
* they are not managed in SW and don't have a true active state. So only
* set vSGIEOICount when no SGIs are in the ap_list.
*
* - GICv2 SGIs with multiple sources are injected one source at a time, as
* if they were made pending sequentially. This may mean that we don't
* always present the HPPI if other interrupts with lower priority are
* pending in the LRs. Big deal.
*/
static void vgic_flush_lr_state(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
{
struct vgic_cpu *vgic_cpu = &vcpu->arch.vgic_cpu;