[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2018 14:47:33 +0200
From: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@...hat.com>
To: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org,
Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>,
Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>,
Janosch Frank <frankja@...ux.ibm.com>,
Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>,
Pierre Morel <pmorel@...ux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 2/2] KVM: s390: introduce and use
KVM_REQ_VSIE_RESTART
On Tue, 7 Aug 2018 14:51:31 +0200
David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com> wrote:
> When we change the crycb (or execution controls), we also have to make sure
> that the vSIE shadow datastructures properly consider the changed
> values before rerunning the vSIE. We can achieve that by simply using a
> VCPU request now.
Is this actually a concrete problem right now, or does this only become
a real concern with vfio-ap?
>
> This has to be a synchronous request (== handled before entering the
> (v)SIE again).
>
> The request will make sure that the vSIE handler is left, and that the
> request will be processed (NOP), therefore forcing a reload of all
> vSIE data (including rebuilding the crycb) when re-entering the vSIE
> interception handler the next time.
>
> Signed-off-by: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
> ---
> arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h | 1 +
> arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c | 7 ++++++-
> 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
Reviewed-by: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@...hat.com>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists