On Thu, 24 Oct 2019 07:40:43 -0400
Janosch Frank <frankja@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> We have two new SIE exit codes 104 for a secure instruction
> interception, on which the SIE needs hypervisor action to complete the
> instruction.
>
> And 108 which is merely a notification and provides data for tracking
> and management, like for the lowcore we set notification bits for the
> lowcore pages.
What about the following:
"With protected virtualization, we have two new SIE exit codes:
- 104 indicates a secure instruction interception; the hypervisor needs
to complete emulation of the instruction.
- 108 is merely a notification providing data for tracking and
management in the hypervisor; for example, we set notification bits
for the lowcore pages."
?
>
> Signed-off-by: Janosch Frank <frankja@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h | 2 ++
> arch/s390/kvm/intercept.c | 23 +++++++++++++++++++++++
> 2 files changed, 25 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h b/arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> index 2a8a1e21e1c3..a42dfe98128b 100644
> --- a/arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> +++ b/arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> @@ -212,6 +212,8 @@ struct kvm_s390_sie_block {
> #define ICPT_KSS 0x5c
> #define ICPT_PV_MCHKR 0x60
> #define ICPT_PV_INT_EN 0x64
> +#define ICPT_PV_INSTR 0x68
> +#define ICPT_PV_NOT 0x6c
Maybe ICPT_PV_NOTIF?
> __u8 icptcode; /* 0x0050 */
> __u8 icptstatus; /* 0x0051 */
> __u16 ihcpu; /* 0x0052 */
> diff --git a/arch/s390/kvm/intercept.c b/arch/s390/kvm/intercept.c
> index b013a9c88d43..a1df8a43c88b 100644
> --- a/arch/s390/kvm/intercept.c
> +++ b/arch/s390/kvm/intercept.c
> @@ -451,6 +451,23 @@ static int handle_operexc(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> return kvm_s390_inject_program_int(vcpu, PGM_OPERATION);
> }
>
> +static int handle_pv_spx(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> +{
> + u32 pref = *(u32 *)vcpu->arch.sie_block->sidad;
> +
> + kvm_s390_set_prefix(vcpu, pref);
> + trace_kvm_s390_handle_prefix(vcpu, 1, pref);
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int handle_pv_not(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> +{
> + if (vcpu->arch.sie_block->ipa == 0xb210)
> + return handle_pv_spx(vcpu);
> +
> + return handle_instruction(vcpu);
Hm... if I understood it correctly, we are getting this one because the
SIE informs us about things that it handled itself (but which we
should be aware of). What can handle_instruction() do in this case?
> +}
> +
> int kvm_handle_sie_intercept(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> {
> int rc, per_rc = 0;
> @@ -505,6 +522,12 @@ int kvm_handle_sie_intercept(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> */
> rc = 0;
> break;
> + case ICPT_PV_INSTR:
> + rc = handle_instruction(vcpu);
> + break;
> + case ICPT_PV_NOT:
> + rc = handle_pv_not(vcpu);
> + break;
> default:
> return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> }
