Re: [PATCH v4 05/15] KVM: s390: enable/disable AP interpretive execution

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 04/16/2018 07:52 AM, Halil Pasic wrote:

On 04/16/2018 01:13 PM, Pierre Morel wrote:
On 16/04/2018 12:51, Pierre Morel wrote:
On 15/04/2018 23:22, Tony Krowiak wrote:
The VFIO AP device model exploits interpretive execution of AP
instructions (APIE) to provide guests passthrough access to AP
devices. This patch introduces a new interface to enable and
disable APIE.

Signed-off-by: Tony Krowiak <akrowiak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
   arch/s390/include/asm/kvm-ap.h   |   16 ++++++++++++++++
   arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h |    1 +
   arch/s390/kvm/kvm-ap.c           |   20 ++++++++++++++++++++
   arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c         |    9 +++++++++
   4 files changed, 46 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/s390/include/asm/kvm-ap.h b/arch/s390/include/asm/kvm-ap.h
index 736e93e..a6c092e 100644
--- a/arch/s390/include/asm/kvm-ap.h
+++ b/arch/s390/include/asm/kvm-ap.h
@@ -35,4 +35,20 @@
    */
   void kvm_ap_build_crycbd(struct kvm *kvm);

+/**
+ * kvm_ap_interpret_instructions
+ *
+ * Indicate whether AP instructions shall be interpreted. If they are not
+ * interpreted, all AP instructions will be intercepted and routed back to
+ * userspace.
+ *
+ * @kvm: the virtual machine attributes
+ * @enable: indicates whether AP instructions are to be interpreted (true) or
+ *        or not (false).
+ *
+ * Returns 0 if completed successfully; otherwise, returns -EOPNOTSUPP
+ * indicating that AP instructions are not installed on the guest.
+ */
+int kvm_ap_interpret_instructions(struct kvm *kvm, bool enable);
+
   #endif /* _ASM_KVM_AP */
diff --git a/arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h b/arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h
index 3162783..5470685 100644
--- a/arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h
+++ b/arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h
@@ -715,6 +715,7 @@ struct kvm_s390_crypto {
       __u32 crycbd;
       __u8 aes_kw;
       __u8 dea_kw;
+    __u8 apie;
   };

   #define APCB0_MASK_SIZE 1
diff --git a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-ap.c b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-ap.c
index 991bae4..55d11b5 100644
--- a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-ap.c
+++ b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-ap.c
@@ -58,3 +58,23 @@ void kvm_ap_build_crycbd(struct kvm *kvm)
       }
   }
   EXPORT_SYMBOL(kvm_ap_build_crycbd);
+
+int kvm_ap_interpret_instructions(struct kvm *kvm, bool enable)
+{
+    int ret = 0;
+
+    mutex_lock(&kvm->lock);
+
+    if (!test_kvm_cpu_feat(kvm, KVM_S390_VM_CPU_FEAT_AP)) {
Do we really need to test CPU_FEAT_AP?

I understand that KVM_S390_VM_CPU_FEAT_AP means AP instructions are interpreted.
shouldn't we add this information in the name?
like KVM_S390_VM_CPU_FEAT_APIE
If I misunderstood and FEAT_AP really mean AP instructions available in the guest,
same question:
is this function called if AP instructions are not available in the guest?

See patch #13. I guess the check above is anyway good as defensive
programming. This implementation should be sane regardless of
the answer to your question.

I agree.


+        ret = -EOPNOTSUPP;
+        goto done;
+    }
+
+    kvm->arch.crypto.apie = enable;
+    kvm_s390_vcpu_crypto_reset_all(kvm);
+
+done:
+    mutex_unlock(&kvm->lock);
+    return ret;
+}
+EXPORT_SYMBOL(kvm_ap_interpret_instructions);
diff --git a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
index 55cd897..1dc8566 100644
--- a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
+++ b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
@@ -1901,6 +1901,9 @@ static void kvm_s390_crypto_init(struct kvm *kvm)
       kvm->arch.crypto.crycb = &kvm->arch.sie_page2->crycb;
       kvm_ap_build_crycbd(kvm);

+    /* Default setting indicating SIE shall interpret AP instructions */
+    kvm->arch.crypto.apie = 1;
+
       if (!test_kvm_facility(kvm, 76))
           return;

@@ -2434,6 +2437,12 @@ static void kvm_s390_vcpu_crypto_setup(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
   {
       vcpu->arch.sie_block->crycbd = vcpu->kvm->arch.crypto.crycbd;

+    vcpu->arch.sie_block->eca &= ~ECA_APIE;
+    if (vcpu->kvm->arch.crypto.apie &&
+        test_kvm_cpu_feat(vcpu->kvm, KVM_S390_VM_CPU_FEAT_AP))
Do we call xxx_crypto_setup() if KVM does not support AP interpretation?
sorry, I should have written AP instructions here:
is this function called if AP instructions are not available in the guest?

Yes, this function can be called with AP instructions available to the guest.
Please have a look at patch 2 (kvm_s390_vm_set_crypto and the rest).

Also this function is called on initialization regardless of AP instructions.

+        vcpu->arch.sie_block->eca |= ECA_APIE;
+
+
       if (!test_kvm_facility(vcpu->kvm, 76))
           return;





[Index of Archives]     [KVM ARM]     [KVM ia64]     [KVM ppc]     [Virtualization Tools]     [Spice Development]     [Libvirt]     [Libvirt Users]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Questions]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]

  Powered by Linux