[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <08c0cf37-afd2-bad3-d1e4-88667e3e5b69@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2022 18:15:39 +0200
From: Thomas Huth <thuth@...hat.com>
To: Pierre Morel <pmorel@...ux.ibm.com>,
Matthew Rosato <mjrosato@...ux.ibm.com>,
linux-s390@...r.kernel.org
Cc: alex.williamson@...hat.com, cohuck@...hat.com,
schnelle@...ux.ibm.com, farman@...ux.ibm.com,
borntraeger@...ux.ibm.com, hca@...ux.ibm.com, gor@...ux.ibm.com,
gerald.schaefer@...ux.ibm.com, agordeev@...ux.ibm.com,
svens@...ux.ibm.com, frankja@...ux.ibm.com, david@...hat.com,
imbrenda@...ux.ibm.com, vneethv@...ux.ibm.com,
oberpar@...ux.ibm.com, freude@...ux.ibm.com, pasic@...ux.ibm.com,
pbonzini@...hat.com, corbet@....net, jgg@...dia.com,
kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 10/21] vfio/pci: introduce CONFIG_VFIO_PCI_ZDEV_KVM
On 14/06/2022 10.56, Pierre Morel wrote:
>
>
> On 6/8/22 15:15, Matthew Rosato wrote:
>> On 6/8/22 2:19 AM, Thomas Huth wrote:
>>> On 06/06/2022 22.33, Matthew Rosato wrote:
>>>> The current contents of vfio-pci-zdev are today only useful in a KVM
>>>> environment; let's tie everything currently under vfio-pci-zdev to
>>>> this Kconfig statement and require KVM in this case, reducing complexity
>>>> (e.g. symbol lookups).
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Matthew Rosato <mjrosato@...ux.ibm.com>
>
> Reviewed-by: Pierre Morel <pmorel@...ux.ibm.com>
>
>
>>>> ---
>>>> drivers/vfio/pci/Kconfig | 11 +++++++++++
>>>> drivers/vfio/pci/Makefile | 2 +-
>>>> include/linux/vfio_pci_core.h | 2 +-
>>>> 3 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/vfio/pci/Kconfig b/drivers/vfio/pci/Kconfig
>>>> index 4da1914425e1..f9d0c908e738 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/vfio/pci/Kconfig
>>>> +++ b/drivers/vfio/pci/Kconfig
>>>> @@ -44,6 +44,17 @@ config VFIO_PCI_IGD
>>>> To enable Intel IGD assignment through vfio-pci, say Y.
>>>> endif
>>>> +config VFIO_PCI_ZDEV_KVM
>>>> + bool "VFIO PCI extensions for s390x KVM passthrough"
>>>> + depends on S390 && KVM
>>>> + default y
>>>> + help
>>>> + Support s390x-specific extensions to enable support for enhancements
>>>> + to KVM passthrough capabilities, such as interpretive execution of
>>>> + zPCI instructions.
>>>> +
>>>> + To enable s390x KVM vfio-pci extensions, say Y.
>>>
>>> Is it still possible to disable CONFIG_VFIO_PCI_ZDEV_KVM ? Looking at the
>>> later patches (e.g. 20/21 where you call kvm_s390_pci_zpci_op() from
>>> kvm-s390.c), it rather seems to me that it currently cannot be disabled
>>> independently (as long as KVM is enabled).
>>
>> Yes, you can build with, for example, CONFIG_VFIO_PCI_ZDEV_KVM=n and
>> CONFIG_KVM=m -- I tested it again just now. The result is kvm and
>> vfio-pci are built and vfio-pci works, but none of the vfio-pci-zdev
>> extensions are available (including zPCI interpretation).
>>
>> This is accomplished via the placement of some IS_ENABLED checks. Some
>> calls (e.g. AEN init) are fenced by IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_VFIO_PCI_ZDEV_KVM).
>> There are also some areas that are fenced off via a call to
>> kvm_s390_pci_interp_allowed() which also includes an IS_ENABLED check
>> along with checks for facility and cpu id.
>>
>> Using patch 20 as an example, KVM_CAP_S390_ZPCI_OP will always be reported
>> as unavailable to userspace if CONFIG_VFIO_PCI_ZDEV_KVM=n due to the call
>> to kvm_s390_pci_interp_allowed(). If userspace sends us the ioctl anyway,
>> we will return -EINVAL because there is again a
>> IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_VFIO_PCI_ZDEV_KVM) check before we read the ioctl args
>> from userspace.
>
> Yes and the code will not be generated by the compiler in patch 20 after the
> break if CONFIG_VFIO_PCI_ZDEV_KVM is not enabled.
>
> + case KVM_S390_ZPCI_OP: {
> + struct kvm_s390_zpci_op args;
> +
> + r = -EINVAL;
> + if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_VFIO_PCI_ZDEV_KVM))
> + break;
>
> Code not generated----v
>
> + if (copy_from_user(&args, argp, sizeof(args))) {
> + r = -EFAULT;
> + break;
> + }
> + r = kvm_s390_pci_zpci_op(kvm, &args);
> + break;
>
> ----------^
OK, good to know, thanks for the clarification!
Thomas
Powered by blists - more mailing lists