On 16/06/2016 09:59, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Jun 2016 09:30:34 +0200
> Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> On 06/16/2016 12:00 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 13/06/2016 16:44, Cornelia Huck wrote:
>>>>>> arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c | 10 +++++-----
>>>>>> arch/x86/kvm/Kconfig | 1 -
>>>>>> arch/x86/kvm/x86.c | 11 +++--------
>>>>>> include/linux/kvm_host.h | 14 ++++++++------
>>>>>> virt/kvm/Kconfig | 3 ---
>>>>>> virt/kvm/kvm_main.c | 27 +++++++++++++++++----------
>>>>>> 6 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 33 deletions(-)
>>>>>>
>>>> Looks like a sane approach, only two inversions in the s390 patch :)
>>>
>>> So it's okay to push patch 3 to kvm/next?
>>
>>
>> With the 2 fixes that Conny requested, yes.
>
> I had been waiting for a v2 ;)
This is the patch I've pushed:
-------------------- 8< ---------------------
>From a03825bbd0c39feeba605912cdbc28e79e4e01e1 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2016 14:50:04 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] KVM: s390: use kvm->created_vcpus
The new created_vcpus field avoids possible races between enabling
capabilities and creating VCPUs.
Acked-by: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@xxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@xxxxxxxxxx>
diff --git a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
index 49c60393a15c..0dcf9b8fc12c 100644
--- a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
+++ b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
@@ -422,7 +422,7 @@ static int kvm_vm_ioctl_enable_cap(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_enable_cap *cap)
break;
case KVM_CAP_S390_VECTOR_REGISTERS:
mutex_lock(&kvm->lock);
- if (atomic_read(&kvm->online_vcpus)) {
+ if (kvm->created_vcpus) {
r = -EBUSY;
} else if (MACHINE_HAS_VX) {
set_kvm_facility(kvm->arch.model.fac_mask, 129);
@@ -437,7 +437,7 @@ static int kvm_vm_ioctl_enable_cap(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_enable_cap *cap)
case KVM_CAP_S390_RI:
r = -EINVAL;
mutex_lock(&kvm->lock);
- if (atomic_read(&kvm->online_vcpus)) {
+ if (kvm->created_vcpus) {
r = -EBUSY;
} else if (test_facility(64)) {
set_kvm_facility(kvm->arch.model.fac_mask, 64);
@@ -492,7 +492,7 @@ static int kvm_s390_set_mem_control(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_device_attr *att
ret = -EBUSY;
VM_EVENT(kvm, 3, "%s", "ENABLE: CMMA support");
mutex_lock(&kvm->lock);
- if (atomic_read(&kvm->online_vcpus) == 0) {
+ if (!kvm->created_vcpus) {
kvm->arch.use_cmma = 1;
ret = 0;
}
@@ -536,7 +536,7 @@ static int kvm_s390_set_mem_control(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_device_attr *att
ret = -EBUSY;
mutex_lock(&kvm->lock);
- if (atomic_read(&kvm->online_vcpus) == 0) {
+ if (!kvm->created_vcpus) {
/* gmap_alloc will round the limit up */
struct gmap *new = gmap_alloc(current->mm, new_limit);
@@ -713,7 +713,7 @@ static int kvm_s390_set_processor(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_device_attr *attr)
int ret = 0;
mutex_lock(&kvm->lock);
- if (atomic_read(&kvm->online_vcpus)) {
+ if (kvm->created_vcpus) {
ret = -EBUSY;
goto out;
}
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
