linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v7 16/17] KVM: s390: pv: add KVM_CAP_S390_PROT_REBOOT

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: <20220207161939.1d382a02@p-imbrenda>
Date:   Mon, 7 Feb 2022 16:19:39 +0100
From:   Claudio Imbrenda <imbrenda@...ux.ibm.com>
To:     Janosch Frank <frankja@...ux.ibm.com>
Cc:     kvm@...r.kernel.org, borntraeger@...ibm.com, thuth@...hat.com,
        pasic@...ux.ibm.com, david@...hat.com, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, scgl@...ux.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 16/17] KVM: s390: pv: add
 KVM_CAP_S390_PROT_REBOOT_ASYNC

On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 15:37:48 +0100
Janosch Frank <frankja@...ux.ibm.com> wrote:

> On 2/4/22 16:53, Claudio Imbrenda wrote:
> > Add KVM_CAP_S390_PROT_REBOOT_ASYNC to signal that the
> > KVM_PV_ASYNC_DISABLE and KVM_PV_ASYNC_DISABLE_PREPARE commands for the
> > KVM_S390_PV_COMMAND ioctl are available.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Claudio Imbrenda <imbrenda@...ux.ibm.com>
> > ---
> >   arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c | 3 +++
> >   include/uapi/linux/kvm.h | 1 +
> >   2 files changed, 4 insertions(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
> > index f7952cef1309..1e696202a569 100644
> > --- a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
> > +++ b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
> > @@ -608,6 +608,9 @@ int kvm_vm_ioctl_check_extension(struct kvm *kvm, long ext)
> >   	case KVM_CAP_S390_BPB:
> >   		r = test_facility(82);
> >   		break;
> > +	case KVM_CAP_S390_PROT_REBOOT_ASYNC:
> > +		r = lazy_destroy && is_prot_virt_host();  
> 
> While reboot might be the best use-case for the async disable I don't 
> think we should name the capability this way.
> 
> KVM_CAP_S390_PROTECTED_ASYNC_DESTR ?

then maybe 

KVM_CAP_S390_PROTECTED_ASYNC_DISABLE ?

> 
> It's a bit long but the initial capability didn't abbreviate the 
> protected part so it is what it is.
> 
> 
> > +		break;
> >   	case KVM_CAP_S390_PROTECTED:
> >   		r = is_prot_virt_host();
> >   		break;
> > diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/kvm.h b/include/uapi/linux/kvm.h
> > index 7f574c87a6ba..c41c108f6b14 100644
> > --- a/include/uapi/linux/kvm.h
> > +++ b/include/uapi/linux/kvm.h
> > @@ -1134,6 +1134,7 @@ struct kvm_ppc_resize_hpt {
> >   #define KVM_CAP_VM_GPA_BITS 207
> >   #define KVM_CAP_XSAVE2 208
> >   #define KVM_CAP_SYS_ATTRIBUTES 209
> > +#define KVM_CAP_S390_PROT_REBOOT_ASYNC 215
> >   
> >   #ifdef KVM_CAP_IRQ_ROUTING
> >   
> >   
>