Re: [PATCH v4 18/36] KVM: S390: protvirt: Introduce instruction data area bounce buffer

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 24.02.20 12:40, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> From: Janosch Frank <frankja@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> Now that we can't access guest memory anymore, we have a dedicated
> satellite block that's a bounce buffer for instruction data.
> 
> We re-use the memop interface to copy the instruction data to / from
> userspace. This lets us re-use a lot of QEMU code which used that
> interface to make logical guest memory accesses which are not possible
> anymore in protected mode anyway.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Janosch Frank <frankja@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Reviewed-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@xxxxxxxxxx>
> [borntraeger@xxxxxxxxxx: patch merging, splitting, fixing]
> Signed-off-by: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@xxxxxxxxxx>

[...]

> +
>  long kvm_arch_vcpu_async_ioctl(struct file *filp,
>  			       unsigned int ioctl, unsigned long arg)
>  {
> @@ -4683,7 +4732,7 @@ long kvm_arch_vcpu_ioctl(struct file *filp,
>  		struct kvm_s390_mem_op mem_op;
>  
>  		if (copy_from_user(&mem_op, argp, sizeof(mem_op)) == 0)
> -			r = kvm_s390_guest_mem_op(vcpu, &mem_op);
> +			r = kvm_s390_guest_memsida_op(vcpu, &mem_op);
>  		else
>  			r = -EFAULT;
>  		break;
> diff --git a/arch/s390/kvm/pv.c b/arch/s390/kvm/pv.c
> index 014e53a41ead..cd81a58349a9 100644
> --- a/arch/s390/kvm/pv.c
> +++ b/arch/s390/kvm/pv.c
> @@ -33,10 +33,13 @@ int kvm_s390_pv_destroy_cpu(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u16 *rc, u16 *rrc)
>  	if (!cc)
>  		free_pages(vcpu->arch.pv.stor_base,
>  			   get_order(uv_info.guest_cpu_stor_len));
> +
> +	free_page(sida_origin(vcpu->arch.sie_block));
>  	vcpu->arch.sie_block->pv_handle_cpu = 0;
>  	vcpu->arch.sie_block->pv_handle_config = 0;
>  	memset(&vcpu->arch.pv, 0, sizeof(vcpu->arch.pv));
>  	vcpu->arch.sie_block->sdf = 0;
> +	vcpu->arch.sie_block->gbea = 1;

I am very confused why gbea is set to 1 when destroying the CPU. It's
otherwise never set (always 0). What's the meaning of this?

Apart from that, looks good to me.


-- 
Thanks,

David / dhildenb




[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Development]     [Kernel Newbies]     [IDE]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite Info]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux ATA RAID]     [Samba]     [Linux Media]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux