Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 14 Jul 2022 10:37:21 +0200 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v12 3/3] KVM: s390: resetting the Topology-Change-Report | From | Pierre Morel <> |
| |
On 7/13/22 11:01, Janosch Frank wrote: > On 7/12/22 13:17, Pierre Morel wrote: >> >> >> On 7/12/22 10:47, Janis Schoetterl-Glausch wrote: >>> On 7/12/22 09:24, Pierre Morel wrote: >>>> >>>>
...
>> kernel. >> >> In userland we check any wrong selector before the instruction goes back >> to the guest. > > I opt for passing the lower selectors down for QEMU to handle.
OK
> >> >>> But that's only relevant if STSI can be extended without a >>> capability, which is why I asked about that. >> >> Logicaly any change, extension, in the architecture should be signaled >> by a facility bit or something. >> >>> >>>> Even testing the facility or PV in the kernel is for my opinion >>>> arguable in the case we do not do any treatment in the kernel. > > That's actually a good point. > > New instruction interceptions for PV will need to be enabled by KVM via > a switch somewhere since the UV can't rely on the fact that KVM will > correctly handle it without an enablement. > > > So please remove the pv check
OK
>
...
>>>>>> +static int kvm_s390_set_topology(struct kvm *kvm, struct >>>>>> kvm_device_attr *attr) >>>>> >>>>> kvm_s390_set_topology_changed maybe? >>>>> kvm_s390_get_topology_changed below then. > > kvm_s390_set_topology_change_indication > > It's long but it's rarely used. > Maybe shorten topology to "topo"
OK I use kvm_s390_get_topo_change_indication()
Thanks.
Regards, Pierre
-- Pierre Morel IBM Lab Boeblingen
| |