linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC 1/2] vfio-ccw: forward halt/clear to device if supported

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20180516175243.2ec79883.cohuck@redhat.com>
Date:   Wed, 16 May 2018 17:52:43 +0200
From:   Cornelia Huck <cohuck@...hat.com>
To:     Pierre Morel <pmorel@...ux.ibm.com>
Cc:     Dong Jia Shi <bjsdjshi@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Halil Pasic <pasic@...ux.ibm.com>, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org,
        kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        qemu-s390x@...gnu.org, qemu-devel@...gnu.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 1/2] vfio-ccw: forward halt/clear to device if
 supported

On Wed, 16 May 2018 15:53:48 +0200
Pierre Morel <pmorel@...ux.ibm.com> wrote:

> On 15/05/2018 18:01, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> > On Fri, 11 May 2018 11:53:52 +0200
> > Pierre Morel <pmorel@...ux.ibm.com> wrote:

> >> Couldn't we introduce ABI versioning ?  
> > Can you elaborate what you're referring to?
> >
> > If you mean checking capabilities of the kernel or so: If we can avoid
> > that and just try (and stop if it does not work), I'd prefer that (no
> > dependencies).  
> 
> VFIO_CHECK_EXTENSION is already used in different drivers
> for this kind of interface extension.
> We could use it to setup appropriate callbacks for scsh/csch/xsch/hsch
> depending on the extension argument.

Hm, this might be useful for things like xsch that aren't really well
served by the current interface. Or we could try using the
device-specific capability interface.

Let me think and play with this a bit.