On Thu, 22 Nov 2018 17:54:32 +0100
Cornelia Huck <cohuck@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Add a region to the vfio-ccw device that can be used to submit
> asynchronous I/O instructions. ssch continues to be handled by the
> existing I/O region; the new region handles hsch and csch.
>
> Interrupt status continues to be reported through the same channels
> as for ssch.
>
> Signed-off-by: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/s390/cio/Makefile | 3 +-
> drivers/s390/cio/vfio_ccw_async.c | 88 ++++++++++++++++
> drivers/s390/cio/vfio_ccw_drv.c | 48 ++++++---
> drivers/s390/cio/vfio_ccw_fsm.c | 158 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> drivers/s390/cio/vfio_ccw_ops.c | 13 ++-
> drivers/s390/cio/vfio_ccw_private.h | 6 ++
> include/uapi/linux/vfio.h | 4 +
> include/uapi/linux/vfio_ccw.h | 12 +++
> 8 files changed, 313 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
> create mode 100644 drivers/s390/cio/vfio_ccw_async.c
>
> diff --git a/drivers/s390/cio/Makefile b/drivers/s390/cio/Makefile
> index f230516abb96..f6a8db04177c 100644
> --- a/drivers/s390/cio/Makefile
> +++ b/drivers/s390/cio/Makefile
> @@ -20,5 +20,6 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_CCWGROUP) += ccwgroup.o
> qdio-objs := qdio_main.o qdio_thinint.o qdio_debug.o qdio_setup.o
> obj-$(CONFIG_QDIO) += qdio.o
>
> -vfio_ccw-objs += vfio_ccw_drv.o vfio_ccw_cp.o vfio_ccw_ops.o vfio_ccw_fsm.o
> +vfio_ccw-objs += vfio_ccw_drv.o vfio_ccw_cp.o vfio_ccw_ops.o vfio_ccw_fsm.o \
> + vfio_ccw_async.o
> obj-$(CONFIG_VFIO_CCW) += vfio_ccw.o
> diff --git a/drivers/s390/cio/vfio_ccw_async.c b/drivers/s390/cio/vfio_ccw_async.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000000..8c7f51d17d70
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/drivers/s390/cio/vfio_ccw_async.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,88 @@
> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> +/*
> + * Async I/O region for vfio_ccw
> + *
> + * Copyright Red Hat, Inc. 2018
> + *
> + * Author(s): Cornelia Huck <cohuck@xxxxxxxxxx>
> + */
> +
> +#include <linux/vfio.h>
> +#include <linux/mdev.h>
> +
> +#include "vfio_ccw_private.h"
> +
> +static size_t vfio_ccw_async_region_read(struct vfio_ccw_private *private,
> + char __user *buf, size_t count,
> + loff_t *ppos)
> +{
> + unsigned int i = VFIO_CCW_OFFSET_TO_INDEX(*ppos) - VFIO_CCW_NUM_REGIONS;
> + loff_t pos = *ppos & VFIO_CCW_OFFSET_MASK;
> + struct ccw_cmd_region *region;
> +
> + if (pos + count > sizeof(*region))
> + return -EINVAL;
> +
> + region = private->region[i].data;
> + if (copy_to_user(buf, (void *)region + pos, count))
> + return -EFAULT;
> +
> + return count;
> +
> +}
> +
> +static size_t vfio_ccw_async_region_write(struct vfio_ccw_private *private,
> + const char __user *buf, size_t count,
> + loff_t *ppos)
> +{
> + unsigned int i = VFIO_CCW_OFFSET_TO_INDEX(*ppos) - VFIO_CCW_NUM_REGIONS;
> + loff_t pos = *ppos & VFIO_CCW_OFFSET_MASK;
> + struct ccw_cmd_region *region;
> +
> + if (pos + count > sizeof(*region))
> + return -EINVAL;
> +
> + if (private->state == VFIO_CCW_STATE_NOT_OPER ||
> + private->state == VFIO_CCW_STATE_STANDBY)
> + return -EACCES;
> +
> + region = private->region[i].data;
> + if (copy_from_user((void *)region + pos, buf, count))
> + return -EFAULT;
I guess vfio_ccw_async_region_write() is supposed to be reentrant in a
sense that there may be more that one 'instances' of the function
executing at the same time, or am I wrong?
If it is reenarant, I wonder what protects private->region[i].data from
corruption or simply being changed 'while at it'?
Regards,
Halil
> +
> + switch (region->command) {
> + case VFIO_CCW_ASYNC_CMD_HSCH:
> + vfio_ccw_fsm_event(private, VFIO_CCW_EVENT_HALT_REQ);
> + break;
> + case VFIO_CCW_ASYNC_CMD_CSCH:
> + vfio_ccw_fsm_event(private, VFIO_CCW_EVENT_CLEAR_REQ);
> + break;
> + default:
> + return -EINVAL;
> + }
> +
> + return region->ret_code ? region->ret_code : count;
> +}
> +
