On Fri, 7 Feb 2020 06:39:55 -0500
Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> From: Janosch Frank <frankja@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> We're not allowed to inject interrupts on intercepts that leave the
> guest state in an "in-beetween" state where the next SIE entry will do a
s/beetween/between/
> continuation. Namely secure instruction interception and secure prefix
s/continuation. Namely/continuation, namely,/
Add which one is 104 and which one is 112, so you can match up the
description with the subject?
> interception.
> As our PSW is just a copy of the real one that will be replaced on the
> next exit, we can mask out the interrupt bits in the PSW to make sure
> that we do not inject anything.
>
> Signed-off-by: Janosch Frank <frankja@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> [borntraeger@xxxxxxxxxx: patch merging, splitting, fixing]
> Signed-off-by: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c | 5 +++++
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
> index ced2bac251a6..8c7b27287b91 100644
> --- a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
> +++ b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
> @@ -4052,6 +4052,7 @@ static int vcpu_post_run(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, int exit_reason)
> return vcpu_post_run_fault_in_sie(vcpu);
> }
>
> +#define PSW_INT_MASK (PSW_MASK_EXT | PSW_MASK_IO | PSW_MASK_MCHECK)
> static int __vcpu_run(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> {
> int rc, exit_reason;
> @@ -4088,6 +4089,10 @@ static int __vcpu_run(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> memcpy(vcpu->run->s.regs.gprs,
> sie_page->pv_grregs,
> sizeof(sie_page->pv_grregs));
Add a comment, as suggested by Thomas last time?
> + if (vcpu->arch.sie_block->icptcode == ICPT_PV_INSTR ||
> + vcpu->arch.sie_block->icptcode == ICPT_PV_PREF) {
> + vcpu->arch.sie_block->gpsw.mask &= ~PSW_INT_MASK;
> + }
> }
> local_irq_disable();
> __enable_cpu_timer_accounting(vcpu);
