linux-kernel - Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH v2 04/15] cpu-model/s390: Introduce S390 CPU models

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <2049D8E0-FE03-4E84-94D0-E23B695BC865@suse.de>
Date:	Fri, 20 Feb 2015 18:50:20 +0100
From:	Alexander Graf <agraf@...e.de>
To:	Michael Mueller <mimu@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc:	"qemu-devel@...gnu.org" <qemu-devel@...gnu.org>,
	"kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-s390@...r.kernel.org" <linux-s390@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Gleb Natapov <gleb@...nel.org>,
	Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>,
	"Jason J. Herne" <jjherne@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Cornelia Huck <cornelia.huck@...ibm.com>,
	Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
	Andreas Faerber <afaerber@...e.de>,
	Richard Henderson <rth@...ddle.net>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH v2 04/15] cpu-model/s390: Introduce S390 CPU models




> Am 20.02.2015 um 18:37 schrieb Michael Mueller <mimu@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>:
> 
> On Fri, 20 Feb 2015 17:57:52 +0100
> Alexander Graf <agraf@...e.de> wrote:
> 
>> Because all CPUs we have in our list only expose 128 bits?
> 
> Here a STFLE result on a EC12 GA2, already more than 128 bits... Is that model on the list?

If that model has 3 elements, yes, the array should span 3.

I hope it's in the list. Every model wecare about should be, no?

> 
> [mimu@...lp59 s390xfac]$ ./s390xfac -b
> fac[0] = 0xfbfffffbfcfff840
> fac[1] = 0xffde000000000000
> fac[2] = 0x1800000000000000
>> 
>>> I want to have this independent from a future machine of the z/Arch. The kernel stores the
>>> full facility set, KVM does and there is no good reason for QEMU not to do. If other
>>> accelerators decide to just implement 64 or 128 bits of facilities that's ok...  
>> 
>> So you want to support CPUs that are not part of the list?
> 
> The architecture at least defines more than 2 or 3. Do you want me to limit it to an arbitrary
> size?. Only in QEMU or also in the KVM interface?

Only internally in QEMU. The kvm interface should definitely be as big as the spec allows!

Alex

> 
> Thanks
> Michael
> 
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/