From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 039A0C43381 for ; Fri, 15 Mar 2019 17:44:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D02E7218A1 for ; Fri, 15 Mar 2019 17:44:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726629AbfCORoH (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Mar 2019 13:44:07 -0400 Received: from mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.158.5]:59424 "EHLO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726506AbfCORoH (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Mar 2019 13:44:07 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098420.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id x2FHi5QG182727 for ; Fri, 15 Mar 2019 13:44:05 -0400 Received: from e06smtp07.uk.ibm.com (e06smtp07.uk.ibm.com [195.75.94.103]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2r8fh5uv12-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Fri, 15 Mar 2019 13:44:04 -0400 Received: from localhost by e06smtp07.uk.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Fri, 15 Mar 2019 17:43:58 -0000 Received: from b06cxnps4074.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (9.149.109.196) by e06smtp07.uk.ibm.com (192.168.101.137) with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted; (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256/256) Fri, 15 Mar 2019 17:43:56 -0000 Received: from b06wcsmtp001.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (b06wcsmtp001.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.105.160]) by b06cxnps4074.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id x2FHhsJ634209800 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 15 Mar 2019 17:43:54 GMT Received: from b06wcsmtp001.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 61365A4069; Fri, 15 Mar 2019 17:43:54 +0000 (GMT) Received: from b06wcsmtp001.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0157DA405B; Fri, 15 Mar 2019 17:43:54 +0000 (GMT) Received: from oc2783563651 (unknown [9.152.224.177]) by b06wcsmtp001.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Fri, 15 Mar 2019 17:43:53 +0000 (GMT) Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2019 18:43:52 +0100 From: Halil Pasic To: Pierre Morel Cc: Cornelia Huck , borntraeger@de.ibm.com, alex.williamson@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, frankja@linux.ibm.com, akrowiak@linux.ibm.com, david@redhat.com, schwidefsky@de.ibm.com, heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com, freude@linux.ibm.com, mimu@linux.ibm.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/7] s390: ap: kvm: add PQAP interception for AQIC In-Reply-To: <9302bd83-44e6-eb60-3e39-dcb3fc33f280@linux.ibm.com> References: <1552493104-30510-1-git-send-email-pmorel@linux.ibm.com> <1552493104-30510-2-git-send-email-pmorel@linux.ibm.com> <20190315112032.13b259c2.cohuck@redhat.com> <9302bd83-44e6-eb60-3e39-dcb3fc33f280@linux.ibm.com> Organization: IBM X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.11.1 (GTK+ 2.24.31; x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 x-cbid: 19031517-0028-0000-0000-0000035486D2 X-IBM-AV-DETECTION: SAVI=unused REMOTE=unused XFE=unused x-cbparentid: 19031517-0029-0000-0000-000024131861 Message-Id: <20190315184352.0151d972@oc2783563651> X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:,, definitions=2019-03-15_12:,, signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=918 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1810050000 definitions=main-1903150123 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 15 Mar 2019 15:10:25 +0100 Pierre Morel wrote: > Sorry, wrong conclusion, handling this in userland will bring us much > too far if we want to answer correctly for the case the hook is not > there but QEMU accepted the facility for AQIC. > > The alternative is easier, we just continue to respond with the > OPERATION exception here and only handle the specification and > privileged exception cases in QEMU and in the hook. I don't quite understand what do you mean by this paragraph. Especially not what do you mean by 'just continue to respond with the OPERATION exception here'. In any case if the guest is supposed to have ap instructions, and does not have facility 65 the right answer is specification and not operation exception. And this has to work regardless of vfio-ap module loaded or not. Regards, Halil > > So, I think the discussion will go on until you come back :) > > Regards, > Pierre