Re: [PATCH v1 RFC 3/6] KVM: s390: use facilities and cpu_id per KVM

From: Alexander Graf
Date: Fri May 16 2014 - 07:55:52 EST



On 13.05.14 16:58, Michael Mueller wrote:
The patch introduces facilities and cpu_ids per virtual machine.
Different virtual machines may want to expose different facilities and
cpu ids to the guest, so let's make them per-vm instead of global.

In addition this patch renames all ocurrences of *facilities to *fac_list
smilar to the already exiting symbol stfl_fac_list in lowcore.

Signed-off-by: Michael Mueller <mimu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Acked-by: Cornelia Huck <cornelia.huck@xxxxxxxxxx>
Reviewed-by: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h | 7 +++
arch/s390/kvm/gaccess.c | 4 +-
arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c | 107 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------
arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.h | 23 +++++++--
arch/s390/kvm/priv.c | 13 +++--
5 files changed, 113 insertions(+), 41 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h b/arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h
index 38d487a..b4751ba 100644
--- a/arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h
+++ b/arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h
@@ -414,6 +414,12 @@ struct kvm_s390_config {
struct kvm_s390_attr_name name;
};
+struct kvm_s390_cpu_model {
+ unsigned long *sie_fac;
+ struct cpuid cpu_id;
+ unsigned long *fac_list;
+};
+
struct kvm_arch{
struct sca_block *sca;
debug_info_t *dbf;
@@ -427,6 +433,7 @@ struct kvm_arch{
wait_queue_head_t ipte_wq;
struct kvm_s390_config *cfg;
spinlock_t start_stop_lock;
+ struct kvm_s390_cpu_model model;
};
#define KVM_HVA_ERR_BAD (-1UL)
diff --git a/arch/s390/kvm/gaccess.c b/arch/s390/kvm/gaccess.c
index db608c3..4c7ca40 100644
--- a/arch/s390/kvm/gaccess.c
+++ b/arch/s390/kvm/gaccess.c
@@ -358,8 +358,8 @@ static unsigned long guest_translate(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, unsigned long gva,
union asce asce;
ctlreg0.val = vcpu->arch.sie_block->gcr[0];
- edat1 = ctlreg0.edat && test_vfacility(8);
- edat2 = edat1 && test_vfacility(78);
+ edat1 = ctlreg0.edat && test_kvm_facility(vcpu->kvm, 8);
+ edat2 = edat1 && test_kvm_facility(vcpu->kvm, 78);
asce.val = get_vcpu_asce(vcpu);
if (asce.r)
goto real_address;
diff --git a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
index 01a5212..a53652f 100644
--- a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
+++ b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
@@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
/*
- * hosting zSeries kernel virtual machines
+ * Hosting zSeries kernel virtual machines
*
* Copyright IBM Corp. 2008, 2009
*
@@ -30,7 +30,6 @@
#include <asm/pgtable.h>
#include <asm/nmi.h>
#include <asm/switch_to.h>
-#include <asm/facility.h>
#include <asm/sclp.h>
#include<asm/timex.h>
#include "kvm-s390.h"
@@ -92,15 +91,33 @@ struct kvm_stats_debugfs_item debugfs_entries[] = {
{ NULL }
};
-unsigned long *vfacilities;
-static struct gmap_notifier gmap_notifier;
+/* upper facilities limit for kvm */
+unsigned long kvm_s390_fac_list_mask[] = {
+ 0xff82fff3f47c2000UL,
+ 0x005c000000000000UL,
+};
+
+unsigned long kvm_s390_fac_list_mask_size(void)
+{
+ BUILD_BUG_ON(ARRAY_SIZE(kvm_s390_fac_list_mask) >
+ S390_ARCH_FAC_MASK_SIZE_U64);
+ return ARRAY_SIZE(kvm_s390_fac_list_mask);
+}
-/* test availability of vfacility */
-int test_vfacility(unsigned long nr)
+void kvm_s390_apply_fac_list_mask(unsigned long fac_list[])
{
- return __test_facility(nr, (void *) vfacilities);
+ unsigned int i;
+
+ for (i = 0; i < S390_ARCH_FAC_LIST_SIZE_U64; i++) {
+ if (i < kvm_s390_fac_list_mask_size())
+ fac_list[i] &= kvm_s390_fac_list_mask[i];
+ else
+ fac_list[i] &= 0UL;
+ }
}
+static struct gmap_notifier gmap_notifier;
+
/* Section: not file related */
int kvm_arch_hardware_enable(void *garbage)
{
@@ -485,6 +502,30 @@ long kvm_arch_vm_ioctl(struct file *filp,
return r;
}
+/* make sure the memory used for fac_list is zeroed */
+void kvm_s390_get_hard_fac_list(unsigned long *fac_list, int size)

Hard? Wouldn't "host" make more sense here?

I also think it makes sense to expose the native host facility list to user space via an ioctl somehow.


Alex

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/