On 06.02.20 11:10, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> On Mon, 3 Feb 2020 08:19:55 -0500
> Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> From: Janosch Frank <frankja@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>
>> We're not allowed to inject interrupts on those intercept codes. As our
>
> Spell out what these codes actually are?
We're not allowed to inject interrupts on intercepts that leave the guest state
in an "in-beetween" state where the next SIE entry will do a continuation.
Namely secure instruction interception and secure prefix interception...
>> @@ -4082,10 +4083,15 @@ static int __vcpu_run(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>> }
>> exit_reason = sie64a(vcpu->arch.sie_block,
>> vcpu->run->s.regs.gprs);
>> + /* This will likely be moved into a new function. */
>
> Hm?
Unless you have a good naming for such function, will remove this comment.
I tried that but I the end result was not better or worse.
>
>> if (kvm_s390_pv_is_protected(vcpu->kvm)) {
>> memcpy(vcpu->run->s.regs.gprs,
>> sie_page->pv_grregs,
>> sizeof(sie_page->pv_grregs));
>> + if (vcpu->arch.sie_block->icptcode == ICPT_PV_INSTR ||
>> + vcpu->arch.sie_block->icptcode == ICPT_PV_PREF) {
>> + vcpu->arch.sie_block->gpsw.mask &= ~PSW_INT_MASK;
>> + }
>> }
>> local_irq_disable();
>> __enable_cpu_timer_accounting(vcpu);
>
