Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH v9 07/22] KVM: s390: refactor crypto initialization | From | Tony Krowiak <> | Date | Tue, 21 Aug 2018 09:29:08 -0400 |
| |
On 08/20/2018 04:41 PM, David Hildenbrand wrote: >>>> + if (test_kvm_cpu_feat(vcpu->kvm, KVM_S390_VM_CPU_FEAT_AP)) >>>> + vcpu->arch.sie_block->eca |= ECA_APIE; >>>> >>>> - vcpu->arch.sie_block->crycbd = vcpu->kvm->arch.crypto.crycbd; >>>> + /* If MSAX3 is installed on the guest, set up protected key support */ >>>> + if (test_kvm_facility(vcpu->kvm, 76)) { >>>> + if (vcpu->kvm->arch.crypto.aes_kw) >>>> + vcpu->arch.sie_block->ecb3 |= ECB3_AES; >>>> + if (vcpu->kvm->arch.crypto.dea_kw) >>>> + vcpu->arch.sie_block->ecb3 |= ECB3_DEA; >>>> + } >>> As the feature can never change, and aes_kw/dea_kw are only set to 1 in >>> case we have test_kvm_facility(vcpu->kvm, 76), this change is not needed. >>> >>> I think this function can be pretty much left alone. Just add the >>> KVM_S390_VM_CPU_FEAT_AP handling. >> I disagree, what about the case where the KVM_S390_VM_CPU_FEAT_AP is >> configured for the guest but the MSAX3 facility (76) is not? > Then aes_kw/dea_kw can never be set. > > kvm_s390_vm_set_crypto() and kvm_s390_crypto_init() correctly test for > facility 76. > > Or am I missing a case?
I stand corrected, you are right. I'll remove the test.
> >>>> } >>>> >>>> void kvm_s390_vcpu_unsetup_cmma(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) >>>> >
| |