On 18.02.20 10:37, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
>
>
> On 18.02.20 10:33, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> eliver_prog(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>>> {
>>> struct kvm_s390_local_interrupt *li = &vcpu->arch.local_int;
>>> @@ -856,6 +871,9 @@ static int __must_check __deliver_prog(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>>> trace_kvm_s390_deliver_interrupt(vcpu->vcpu_id, KVM_S390_PROGRAM_INT,
>>> pgm_info.code, 0);
>>>
>>> + if (kvm_s390_pv_is_protected(vcpu->kvm))
>>
>> Can we actually ever have PER set, and what would happen if so?
>> Shouldn't we also return -EINVAL?
>
> The ultravisor would add a concurrent PER event if appropriate.
>
Please add that to the patch description.
Reviewed-by: David Hildenbrand <david@xxxxxxxxxx>
--
Thanks,
David / dhildenb
