linux-kernel - Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v5 11/17] target-s390x: Add KVM VM attribute interface for 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]

Date:	Mon, 27 Apr 2015 11:43:53 +0200
From:	Michael Mueller <mimu@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:	Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>
Cc:	qemu-devel@...gnu.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@...hat.com>,
	Gleb Natapov <gleb@...nel.org>, Alexander Graf <agraf@...e.de>,
	Daniel Hansel <daniel.hansel@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	"Jason J. Herne" <jjherne@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Cornelia Huck <cornelia.huck@...ibm.com>,
	Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
	Richard Henderson <rth@...ddle.net>,
	Andreas Faerber <afaerber@...e.de>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v5 11/17] target-s390x: Add KVM VM
 attribute interface for S390 CPU models

On Mon, 27 Apr 2015 10:15:47 +0200
Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com> wrote:

> Am 13.04.2015 um 15:56 schrieb Michael Mueller:
> [...]
> > +static int cpu_model_get(KVMState *s, uint64_t attr, uint64_t addr)
> > +{
> > +    int rc = -ENOSYS;
> > +    struct kvm_device_attr dev_attr = {
> > +        .group = KVM_S390_VM_CPU_MODEL,
> > +        .attr = attr,
> > +        .addr = addr,
> 
> Would it make sense to do the cast here....

cpu_model_get/set() is used to handle both attributes,
KVM_S390_VM_CPU_MACHINE and KVM_S390_VM_CPU_PROCESSOR.
Both require a different type in the signature, (S390ProcessorProps*)
and (S390MachineProps*). Adding both as parameters seems to be odd
and would require additionally logic in the function.
Thus I think doing the cast outside is just the right thing to do.

Michael

> > +    };
> > +
> > +    if (kvm_vm_check_attr(s, dev_attr.group, dev_attr.attr)) {
> > +        rc = kvm_vm_ioctl(s, KVM_GET_DEVICE_ATTR, &dev_attr);
> > +    }
> > +
> > +    return rc;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int cpu_model_set(KVMState *s, uint64_t attr, uint64_t addr)
> > +{
> > +    int rc = -ENOSYS;
> > +    struct kvm_device_attr dev_attr = {
> > +        .group = KVM_S390_VM_CPU_MODEL,
> > +        .attr = attr,
> > +        .addr = addr,
> 
> ...and here...
> 
> > +    };
> > +
> > +    if (kvm_vm_check_attr(s, dev_attr.group, dev_attr.attr)) {
> > +        rc = kvm_vm_ioctl(s, KVM_SET_DEVICE_ATTR, &dev_attr);
> > +    }
> > +
> > +    return rc;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int kvm_s390_get_machine_props(KVMState *s, S390MachineProps *prop)
> > +{
> > +    int rc = -EFAULT;
> > +
> > +    if (s) {
> > +        rc = cpu_model_get(s, KVM_S390_VM_CPU_MACHINE, (uint64_t) prop);
> 
> and pass S390MachineProps as 3rd parameter?
> 
> 
> > +int kvm_s390_get_processor_props(S390ProcessorProps *prop)
> > +{
> > +    int rc;
> > +
> > +    rc = cpu_model_get(kvm_state, KVM_S390_VM_CPU_PROCESSOR, (uint64_t) prop);
> 
> dito
> > +    trace_kvm_get_processor_props(rc, prop->cpuid, prop->ibc);
> > +    return rc;
> > +}
> > +
> > +int kvm_s390_set_processor_props(S390ProcessorProps *prop)
> > +{
> > +    int rc;
> > +
> > +    rc = cpu_model_set(kvm_state, KVM_S390_VM_CPU_PROCESSOR, (uint64_t) prop);
> 
> dito

--
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/