On 02/19/2018 12:20 PM, David Hildenbrand wrote: > On 19.02.2018 09:53, Christian Borntraeger wrote: >> Some facilities should only provided to the guest, if these are >> enabled by a CPU model. This allows to avoid capabilities and >> simply fallback to the cpumodel for deciding about a facility >> without enabling it for older QEMUs or QEMUs without a CPU >> model. >> >> Signed-off-by: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@xxxxxxxxxx> >> --- >> arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------- >> arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.h | 2 -- >> arch/s390/tools/gen_facilities.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++++++ >> 3 files changed, 52 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c >> index 5b7fe80cda56..7d982690b1fc 100644 >> --- a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c >> +++ b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c >> @@ -151,13 +151,27 @@ static int nested; >> module_param(nested, int, S_IRUGO); >> MODULE_PARM_DESC(nested, "Nested virtualization support"); >> >> -/* upper facilities limit for kvm */ >> -unsigned long kvm_s390_fac_list_mask[16] = { FACILITIES_KVM }; >> >> -unsigned long kvm_s390_fac_list_mask_size(void) >> +/* >> + * For now we handle not more than 16 double words as this is what >> + * the s390 base kernel handles and stores in prefix page. If we >> + * ever need to go beyond this, this requires changes to code, but >> + * the external uapi can stay. >> + */ >> +#define SIZE_INTERNAL 16 >> + >> +/* upper facilities limit for kvm */ >> +static unsigned long kvm_s390_fac_list_mask[SIZE_INTERNAL] = { FACILITIES_KVM }; >> +/* >> + * facility bits that are in the mask, but initially not in the list. >> + * Those can be activated by the CPU model >> + */ >> +static unsigned long kvm_s390_fac_model[SIZE_INTERNAL] = { FACILITIES_KVM_CPUMODEL }; > > _list_mask vs _model > > Can we make this more consistent? I will try. > > >> + >> +static unsigned long kvm_s390_fac_size(void) >> { >> - BUILD_BUG_ON(ARRAY_SIZE(kvm_s390_fac_list_mask) > S390_ARCH_FAC_MASK_SIZE_U64); >> - return ARRAY_SIZE(kvm_s390_fac_list_mask); >> + BUILD_BUG_ON(SIZE_INTERNAL > S390_ARCH_FAC_MASK_SIZE_U64); >> + return SIZE_INTERNAL; >> } >> >> /* available cpu features supported by kvm */ >> @@ -1946,17 +1960,27 @@ int kvm_arch_init_vm(struct kvm *kvm, unsigned long type) >> memcpy(kvm->arch.model.fac_mask, S390_lowcore.stfle_fac_list, >> sizeof(S390_lowcore.stfle_fac_list)); >> for (i = 0; i < S390_ARCH_FAC_LIST_SIZE_U64; i++) { >> - if (i < kvm_s390_fac_list_mask_size()) >> - kvm->arch.model.fac_mask[i] &= kvm_s390_fac_list_mask[i]; >> + if (i < kvm_s390_fac_size()) >> + kvm->arch.model.fac_mask[i] &= (kvm_s390_fac_list_mask[i] | >> + kvm_s390_fac_model[i]); >> else >> kvm->arch.model.fac_mask[i] = 0UL; >> } >> >> - /* Populate the facility list initially. */ >> + /* Populate the facility list initially as a copy of the mask */ >> kvm->arch.model.fac_list = kvm->arch.sie_page2->fac_list; >> memcpy(kvm->arch.model.fac_list, kvm->arch.model.fac_mask, >> S390_ARCH_FAC_LIST_SIZE_BYTE); >> > > If you need a loop either way, why not simply drop the memcpy and > instead do it explicitly in a single loop? Yes, can do. I will also remove the zeroing (as in your other patch). To do that I need to limit kvm_s390_fac_list_mask_size to not exceed sizeof(S390_lowcore.stfle_fac_list) though. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-s390" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html