[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2022 15:10:34 +0200
From: Janosch Frank <frankja@...ux.ibm.com>
To: Claudio Imbrenda <imbrenda@...ux.ibm.com>
Cc: kvm@...r.kernel.org, borntraeger@...ibm.com, thuth@...hat.com,
david@...hat.com, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, scgl@...ux.ibm.com,
seiden@...ux.ibm.com, nrb@...ux.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v14 3/6] KVM: s390: pv: add
KVM_CAP_S390_PROTECTED_ASYNC_DISABLE
On 10/10/22 14:15, Claudio Imbrenda wrote:
> On Mon, 10 Oct 2022 13:45:54 +0200
> Janosch Frank <frankja@...ux.ibm.com> wrote:
>
>> On 9/30/22 16:01, Claudio Imbrenda wrote:
>>> Add KVM_CAP_S390_PROTECTED_ASYNC_DISABLE 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>
>>> Reviewed-by: Nico Boehr <nrb@...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 d0027964a6f5..7a3bd68efd85 100644
>>> --- a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
>>> +++ b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
>>> @@ -618,6 +618,9 @@ 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_PROTECTED_ASYNC_DISABLE:
>>> + r = async_destroy && is_prot_virt_host();
>>> + 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 02602c5c1975..9afe0084b2c5 100644
>>> --- a/include/uapi/linux/kvm.h
>>> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/kvm.h
>>> @@ -1177,6 +1177,7 @@ struct kvm_ppc_resize_hpt {
>>> #define KVM_CAP_VM_DISABLE_NX_HUGE_PAGES 220
>>> #define KVM_CAP_S390_ZPCI_OP 221
>>> #define KVM_CAP_S390_CPU_TOPOLOGY 222
>>> +#define KVM_CAP_S390_PROTECTED_ASYNC_DISABLE 225
>>
>> I can see 223 in Paolo's next, is there a 224 that I've missed?
>
> no, I set this to an arbitrarily high value to avoid conficts
>
> seems like I got it more or less right :)
>
> feel free to change the value of the macro when merging, so it's
> contiguous.
Reviewed-by: Janosch Frank <frankja@...ux.ibm.com>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists