KVM: arm64: timer: Correctly handle EL1 timer emulation when !FEAT_ECV

Both Wei-Lin Chang and Volodymyr Babchuk report that the way we
handle the emulation of EL1 timers with NV is completely wrong,
specially in the case of HCR_EL2.E2H==0.

There are three problems in about as many lines of code:

- With E2H==0, the EL1 timers are overwritten with the EL1 state,
  while they should actually contain the EL2 state (as per the timer
  map)

- With E2H==1, we run the full EL1 timer emulation even when ECV
  is present, hiding a bug in timer_emulate() (see previous patch)

- The comments are actively misleading, and say all the wrong things.

This is only attributable to the code having been initially written
for FEAT_NV, hacked up to handle FEAT_NV2 *in parallel*, and vaguely
hacked again to be FEAT_NV2 only. Oh, and yours truly being a gold
plated idiot.

The fix is obvious: just delete most of the E2H==0 code, have a unified
handling of the timers (because they really are E2H agnostic), and
make sure we don't execute any of that when FEAT_ECV is present.

Fixes: 4bad306 ("KVM: arm64: nv: Sync nested timer state with FEAT_NV2")
Reported-by: Wei-Lin Chang <r09922117@csie.ntu.edu.tw>
Reported-by: Volodymyr Babchuk <Volodymyr_Babchuk@epam.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/fqiqfjzwpgbzdtouu2pwqlu7llhnf5lmy4hzv5vo6ph4v3vyls@jdcfy3fjjc5k
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/87frl51tse.fsf@epam.com
Tested-by: Dmytro Terletskyi <dmytro_terletskyi@epam.com>
Reviewed-by: Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@linux.dev>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250204110050.150560-3-maz@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>

Author: Marc Zyngier

arch/arm64/kvm/arch_timer.c

@@ -974,31 +974,21 @@ void kvm_timer_sync_nested(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
 	 * which allows trapping of the timer registers even with NV2.
 	 * Still, this is still worse than FEAT_NV on its own. Meh.
 	 */
-	if (!vcpu_el2_e2h_is_set(vcpu)) {
-		if (cpus_have_final_cap(ARM64_HAS_ECV))
-			return;
-
-		/*
-		 * A non-VHE guest hypervisor doesn't have any direct access
-		 * to its timers: the EL2 registers trap (and the HW is
-		 * fully emulated), while the EL0 registers access memory
-		 * despite the access being notionally direct. Boo.
-		 *
-		 * We update the hardware timer registers with the
-		 * latest value written by the guest to the VNCR page
-		 * and let the hardware take care of the rest.
-		 */
-		write_sysreg_el0(__vcpu_sys_reg(vcpu, CNTV_CTL_EL0),  SYS_CNTV_CTL);
-		write_sysreg_el0(__vcpu_sys_reg(vcpu, CNTV_CVAL_EL0), SYS_CNTV_CVAL);
-		write_sysreg_el0(__vcpu_sys_reg(vcpu, CNTP_CTL_EL0),  SYS_CNTP_CTL);
-		write_sysreg_el0(__vcpu_sys_reg(vcpu, CNTP_CVAL_EL0), SYS_CNTP_CVAL);
-	} else {
+	if (!cpus_have_final_cap(ARM64_HAS_ECV)) {
 		/*
 		 * For a VHE guest hypervisor, the EL2 state is directly
-		 * stored in the host EL1 timers, while the emulated EL0
+		 * stored in the host EL1 timers, while the emulated EL1
 		 * state is stored in the VNCR page. The latter could have
 		 * been updated behind our back, and we must reset the
 		 * emulation of the timers.
+		 *
+		 * A non-VHE guest hypervisor doesn't have any direct access
+		 * to its timers: the EL2 registers trap despite being
+		 * notionally direct (we use the EL1 HW, as for VHE), while
+		 * the EL1 registers access memory.
+		 *
+		 * In both cases, process the emulated timers on each guest
+		 * exit. Boo.
 		 */
 		struct timer_map map;
 		get_timer_map(vcpu, &map);