Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2 07/15] KVM: s390: Interfaces to configure/deconfigure guest's AP matrix | From | Tony Krowiak <> | Date | Wed, 28 Feb 2018 14:11:38 -0500 |
| |
On 02/28/2018 11:15 AM, Pierre Morel wrote: > On 27/02/2018 15:28, Tony Krowiak wrote: >> Provides interfaces to assign AP adapters, usage domains >> and control domains to a KVM guest. >> >> A KVM guest is started by executing the Start Interpretive Execution >> (SIE) >> instruction. The SIE state description is a control block that >> contains the >> state information for a KVM guest and is supplied as input to the SIE >> instruction. The SIE state description has a satellite structure >> called the >> Crypto Control Block (CRYCB). The CRYCB contains three bitmask fields >> identifying the adapters, queues (domains) and control domains >> assigned to >> the KVM guest: >> >> * The AP Adapter Mask (APM) field identifies the AP adapters assigned to >> the KVM guest >> >> * The AP Queue Mask (AQM) field identifies the AP queues assigned to >> the KVM guest. Each AP queue is connected to a usage domain within >> an AP adapter. >> >> * The AP Domain Mask (ADM) field identifies the control domains >> assigned to the KVM guest. >> >> Each adapter, queue (usage domain) and control domain are identified by >> a number from 0 to 255. The bits in each mask, from most significant to >> least significant bit, correspond to the numbers 0-255. When a bit is >> set, the corresponding adapter, queue (usage domain) or control domain >> is assigned to the KVM guest. > > ...snip... > >> static int kvm_ap_apxa_installed(void) >> { >> int ret; >> @@ -50,3 +170,140 @@ void kvm_ap_set_crycb_format(struct kvm *kvm, >> __u32 *crycbd) >> *crycbd |= CRYCB_FORMAT1; >> } >> } >> + >> +static int kvm_ap_matrix_apm_create(struct kvm_ap_matrix *ap_matrix, >> int apxa) >> +{ >> + if (apxa) >> + ap_matrix->apm_max = 256; > > AFAIK the number of possible bits in the masks for a system is not a > generic value but is > returned by the QCI instruction. > Is there a reason to use a fix value? Right you are! I'll initialize the value based on what is returned from the QCI call. > > >> + else >> + ap_matrix->apm_max = 64; >> + >> + ap_matrix->apm = kzalloc(KVM_AP_MASK_BYTES(ap_matrix->apm_max), >> + GFP_KERNEL); >> + if (!ap_matrix->apm) >> + return -ENOMEM; >> + >> + return 0; >> +} >> + >> +static int kvm_ap_matrix_aqm_create(struct kvm_ap_matrix *ap_matrix, >> int apxa) >> +{ >> + if (apxa) >> + ap_matrix->aqm_max = 256; > > same here ditto > >> + else >> + ap_matrix->aqm_max = 16; >> + >> + ap_matrix->aqm = kzalloc(KVM_AP_MASK_BYTES(ap_matrix->aqm_max), >> + GFP_KERNEL); >> + if (!ap_matrix->aqm) >> + return -ENOMEM; >> + >> + return 0; >> +} >> + >> +static int kvm_ap_matrix_adm_create(struct kvm_ap_matrix *ap_matrix, >> int apxa) >> +{ >> + if (apxa) >> + ap_matrix->adm_max = 256; > > and here ditto > > > Pierre >
| |