On 15/11/2019 11.16, Janosch Frank wrote:
> On 11/15/19 9:04 AM, Thomas Huth wrote:
>> On 24/10/2019 13.40, Janosch Frank wrote:
>>> STHYI data has to go through the bounce buffer.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Janosch Frank <frankja@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>> arch/s390/kvm/intercept.c | 15 ++++++++++-----
>>> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/s390/kvm/intercept.c b/arch/s390/kvm/intercept.c
>>> index 510b1dee3320..37cb62bc261b 100644
>>> --- a/arch/s390/kvm/intercept.c
>>> +++ b/arch/s390/kvm/intercept.c
>>> @@ -391,7 +391,7 @@ int handle_sthyi(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>>> goto out;
>>> }
>>>
>>> - if (addr & ~PAGE_MASK)
>>> + if (!kvm_s390_pv_is_protected(vcpu->kvm) && (addr & ~PAGE_MASK))
>>> return kvm_s390_inject_program_int(vcpu, PGM_SPECIFICATION);
>>>
>>> sctns = (void *)get_zeroed_page(GFP_KERNEL);
>>> @@ -402,10 +402,15 @@ int handle_sthyi(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>>>
>>> out:
>>> if (!cc) {
>>> - r = write_guest(vcpu, addr, reg2, sctns, PAGE_SIZE);
>>> - if (r) {
>>> - free_page((unsigned long)sctns);
>>> - return kvm_s390_inject_prog_cond(vcpu, r);
>>> + if (kvm_s390_pv_is_protected(vcpu->kvm)) {
>>> + memcpy((void *)vcpu->arch.sie_block->sidad, sctns,
>>
>> sidad & PAGE_MASK, just to be sure?
>
> How about a macro or just saving the pointer in an arch struct?
Sounds fine, too. I think I'd personally slightly prefer a macro.
Thomas
