lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2021]   [Jul]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH] KVM: s390: Enable specification exception interpretation
From
Date
On 7/7/21 10:54 AM, Cornelia Huck wrote:

[...]

>
>>> diff --git a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
>>> index b655a7d82bf0..aadd589a3755 100644
>>> --- a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
>>> +++ b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
>>> @@ -3200,6 +3200,8 @@ static int kvm_s390_vcpu_setup(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>>> vcpu->arch.sie_block->ecb |= ECB_SRSI;
>>> if (test_kvm_facility(vcpu->kvm, 73))
>>> vcpu->arch.sie_block->ecb |= ECB_TE;
>
> Maybe add
>
> /* no facility bit, but safe as the hardware may ignore it */
>
> or something like that, so that we don't stumble over that in the future?

Well, the hardware being allowed to ignore the bit makes its introduction
without an indication forward compatible because it does not require vSIE to be adapted.
The reserved bits are implicitly set to 0 which means new features are disabled
by default and one observes all the interception one expects.

Maybe this:

/* no facility bit, can opt in because we do not need
to observe specification exception intercepts */

?

>
>>> + if (!kvm_is_ucontrol(vcpu->kvm))
>>> + vcpu->arch.sie_block->ecb |= ECB_SPECI;
>>>
>>> if (test_kvm_facility(vcpu->kvm, 8) && vcpu->kvm->arch.use_pfmfi)
>>> vcpu->arch.sie_block->ecb2 |= ECB2_PFMFI;
>
> Reviewed-by: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>
>

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2021-07-07 11:59    [W:0.324 / U:0.352 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site