On Thu, 9 Aug 2018 18:27:16 +0200
Pierre Morel <pmorel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 09/08/2018 13:06, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> > On Wed, 8 Aug 2018 10:44:19 -0400
> > Tony Krowiak <akrowiak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> >> diff --git a/drivers/s390/crypto/vfio_ap_drv.c b/drivers/s390/crypto/vfio_ap_drv.c
> >> index d7e39ad..6a827f3 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/s390/crypto/vfio_ap_drv.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/s390/crypto/vfio_ap_drv.c
> >> @@ -12,6 +12,7 @@
> >> #include <linux/mod_devicetable.h>
> >> #include <linux/slab.h>
> >> #include <linux/string.h>
> >> +#include <asm/zcrypt.h>
> >> #include "vfio_ap_private.h"
> >>
> >> #define VFIO_AP_ROOT_NAME "vfio_ap"
> >> @@ -68,6 +69,18 @@ static int vfio_ap_matrix_dev_create(void)
> >> {
> >> int ret;
> >>
> >> + mutex_init(&matrix_dev.lock);
> >> + INIT_LIST_HEAD(&matrix_dev.mdev_list);
> >> +
> >> + /* Test if PQAP(QCI) instruction is available */
> >> + if (test_facility(12)) {
> >> + ret = ap_qci(&matrix_dev.info);
> >> + if (ret)
> >> + return ret;
> >> + }
> >> +
> >> + atomic_set(&matrix_dev.available_instances, MAX_ZDEV_ENTRIES_EXT);
> >> +
> >> ret = misc_register(&matrix_dev.misc_dev);
> > OK, you are adding more stuff other than the miscdevice after all...
> > still, I don't think that this is a good idea.
> >
> > I think I had already asked this for a previous version: Why has this
> > been turned into a miscdevice? (I think my reaction to the answer was
> > 'meh'... but I think more and more that we should not do that.)
>
> Following our off-line conversation...
>
> I understand your concern, about the misc device and dynamically
> updating the misc device structure.
>
> For it is your main point of contention and we do not currently have
> a use case for the misc device I propose we just let it go and
> rebase on the device design we had in V6 and did not seem to
> make any trouble to any one.
>
> We will propose a v9 with the integration of all comment done
> so far soon as possible.
Sounds good to me!
