Subject: [PATCH 5/7] KVM: arm64: guest debug, add support for single-step

From: [email-masked] (Alex Bennée)
Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2014 18:00:45 +0000

Andrew Jones <[email-masked]> writes:

> On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 04:10:03PM +0000, Alex Benn?e wrote:
>> This adds support for single-stepping the guest. As userspace can and
>> will manipulate guest registers before restarting any tweaking of the
>> registers has to occur just before control is passed back to the guest.
>> Furthermore while guest debugging is in effect we need to squash the
>> ability of the guest to single-step itself as we have no easy way of
>> re-entering the guest after the exception has been delivered to the
>> hypervisor.
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Alex Benn?e <[email-masked]>
>> 
>> diff --git a/arch/arm/kvm/arm.c b/arch/arm/kvm/arm.c
>> index 48d26bb..a76daae 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm/kvm/arm.c
>> +++ b/arch/arm/kvm/arm.c
>> @@ -38,6 +38,7 @@
>>  #include <asm/tlbflush.h>
>>  #include <asm/cacheflush.h>
>>  #include <asm/virt.h>
>> +#include <asm/debug-monitors.h>
>>  #include <asm/kvm_arm.h>
>>  #include <asm/kvm_asm.h>
>>  #include <asm/kvm_mmu.h>
>> @@ -300,6 +301,17 @@ void kvm_arch_vcpu_put(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>>  	kvm_arm_set_running_vcpu(NULL);
>>  }
>>  
>> +/**
>> + * kvm_arch_vcpu_ioctl_set_guest_debug - Setup guest debugging
>> + * @kvm:	pointer to the KVM struct
>> + * @kvm_guest_debug: the ioctl data buffer
>> + *
>> + * This sets up the VM for guest debugging. Care has to be taken when
>> + * manipulating guest registers as these will be set/cleared by the
>> + * hyper-visor controller, typically before each kvm_run event. As a
>> + * result modification of the guest registers needs to take place
>> + * after they have been restored in the hyp.S trampoline code.
>> + */
>>  int kvm_arch_vcpu_ioctl_set_guest_debug(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
>>  					struct kvm_guest_debug *dbg)
>>  {
>> @@ -317,8 +329,8 @@ int kvm_arch_vcpu_ioctl_set_guest_debug(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
>>  
>>  	/* Single Step */
>>  	if (vcpu->guest_debug & KVM_GUESTDBG_SINGLESTEP) {
>> -		kvm_info("SS requested, not yet implemented\n");
>> -		return -EINVAL;
>> +		kvm_info("SS requested\n");
>> +		route_el2 = true;
>>  	}
>>  
>>  	/* Software Break Points */
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/asm-offsets.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/asm-offsets.c
>> index 8da1043..78e5ae1 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/asm-offsets.c
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/asm-offsets.c
>> @@ -121,6 +121,7 @@ int main(void)
>>    DEFINE(VCPU_FAR_EL2,		offsetof(struct kvm_vcpu, arch.fault.far_el2));
>>    DEFINE(VCPU_HPFAR_EL2,	offsetof(struct kvm_vcpu, arch.fault.hpfar_el2));
>>    DEFINE(VCPU_DEBUG_FLAGS,	offsetof(struct kvm_vcpu, arch.debug_flags));
>> +  DEFINE(GUEST_DEBUG,		offsetof(struct kvm_vcpu, guest_debug));
>>    DEFINE(VCPU_HCR_EL2,		offsetof(struct kvm_vcpu, arch.hcr_el2));
>>    DEFINE(VCPU_MDCR_EL2,	offsetof(struct kvm_vcpu, arch.mdcr_el2));
>>    DEFINE(VCPU_IRQ_LINES,	offsetof(struct kvm_vcpu, arch.irq_lines));
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/handle_exit.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/handle_exit.c
>> index 28dc92b..6def054 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/handle_exit.c
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/handle_exit.c
>> @@ -91,6 +91,25 @@ static int kvm_handle_bkpt(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct kvm_run *run)
>>  	return 0;
>>  }
>>  
>> +/**
>> + * kvm_handle_ss - handle single step exceptions
>> + *
>> + * @vcpu:	the vcpu pointer
>
> same @run comment as other handler header in previous patch

Yeah I think I'll be merging them all together given the comments about
passing syndrome info directly.

>> + *
>> + * See: ARM ARM D2.12 for the details. While the host is routing debug
>> + * exceptions to it's handlers we have to suppress the ability of the
>> + * guest to trigger exceptions.
>> + */
>> +static int kvm_handle_ss(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct kvm_run *run)
>> +{
>> +	WARN_ON(!(vcpu->guest_debug & KVM_GUESTDBG_SINGLESTEP));
>
> I'm not sure about this WARN_ON. Is there some scenario you were
> thinking of when you put it here? Is there some scenario where this
> could trigger so frequently we kill the log buffer?

The main one I had in mind was not suppressing the guest's attempt to
step while guest debugging was running.

<snip>
>>  
>> -/* for KVM_SET_GUEST_DEBUG */
>> -
>> -#define KVM_GUESTDBG_ENABLE		0x00000001
>> -#define KVM_GUESTDBG_SINGLESTEP		0x00000002
>> -
>>  struct kvm_guest_debug {
>>  	__u32 control;
>>  	__u32 pad;
>> @@ -1189,4 +1186,15 @@ struct kvm_assigned_msix_entry {
>>  	__u16 padding[3];
>>  };
>>  
>> +#endif /* __ASSEMBLY__ */
>> +
>> +/* for KVM_SET_GUEST_DEBUG */
>> +
>> +#define KVM_GUESTDBG_ENABLE_SHIFT	0
>> +#define KVM_GUESTDBG_ENABLE		(1 << KVM_GUESTDBG_ENABLE_SHIFT)
>> +#define KVM_GUESTDBG_SINGLESTEP_SHIFT	1
>> +#define KVM_GUESTDBG_SINGLESTEP	(1 << KVM_GUESTDBG_SINGLESTEP_SHIFT)
>
> EALIGN: we can tab these defines up better

Sure, I'll clean those up.

-- 
Alex Benn?e