linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v9 3/3] s390x: KVM: resetting the Topology-Change-Report

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: <bae4e416-b0e9-31c6-c9d0-df6b5a5fd46f@linux.ibm.com>
Date:   Mon, 16 May 2022 16:21:54 +0200
From:   Pierre Morel <pmorel@...ux.ibm.com>
To:     David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
        Claudio Imbrenda <imbrenda@...ux.ibm.com>
Cc:     kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, borntraeger@...ibm.com,
        frankja@...ux.ibm.com, cohuck@...hat.com, thuth@...hat.com,
        hca@...ux.ibm.com, gor@...ux.ibm.com, wintera@...ux.ibm.com,
        seiden@...ux.ibm.com, nrb@...ux.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 3/3] s390x: KVM: resetting the Topology-Change-Report

On 5/12/22 12:01, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>>>
>>> I think we prefer something like u16 when copying to user space.
>>
>> but then userspace also has to expect a u16, right?
> 
> Yep.
> 

Yes but in fact, inspired by previous discussion I had on the VFIO 
interface, that is the reason why I did prefer an int.
It is much simpler than a u16 and the definition of a bit.

Despite a bit in a u16 is what the s3990 achitecture proposes I thought 
we could make it easier on the KVM/QEMU interface.

But if the discussion stops here, I will do as you both propose change 
to u16 in KVM and userland and add the documentation for the interface.

Regards,
Pierre

-- 
Pierre Morel
IBM Lab Boeblingen