On Tue, 8 Sep 2020 09:52:48 +0200 Janosch Frank <frankja@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 9/7/20 6:30 PM, Cornelia Huck wrote: > > On Mon, 7 Sep 2020 10:33:52 -0400 > > Janosch Frank <frankja@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > >> The storage key removal facility makes skey related instructions > >> result in special operation program exceptions. It is based on the > >> Keyless Subset Facility. > >> > >> The usual suspects are iske, sske, rrbe and their respective > >> variants. lpsw(e), pfmf and tprot can also specify a key and essa with > >> an ORC of 4 will consult the change bit, hence they all result in > >> exceptions. > >> > >> Unfortunately storage keys were so essential to the architecture, that > >> there is no facility bit that we could deactivate. That's why the > >> removal facility (bit 169) was introduced which makes it necessary, > >> that, if active, the skey related facilities 10, 14, 66, 145 and 149 > >> are zero. Managing this requirement and migratability has to be done > >> in userspace, as KVM does not check the facilities it receives to be > >> able to easily implement userspace emulation. > >> > >> Removing storage key support allows us to circumvent complicated > >> emulation code and makes huge page support tremendously easier. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Janosch Frank <frankja@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >> --- > >> > >> v2: > >> * Removed the likely > >> * Updated and re-shuffeled the comments which had the wrong information > >> > >> --- > >> arch/s390/kvm/intercept.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- > >> arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c | 5 +++++ > >> arch/s390/kvm/priv.c | 26 ++++++++++++++++++++++--- > >> 3 files changed, 67 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/arch/s390/kvm/intercept.c b/arch/s390/kvm/intercept.c > >> index e7a7c499a73f..983647ea2abe 100644 > >> --- a/arch/s390/kvm/intercept.c > >> +++ b/arch/s390/kvm/intercept.c > >> @@ -33,6 +33,7 @@ u8 kvm_s390_get_ilen(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > >> case ICPT_OPEREXC: > >> case ICPT_PARTEXEC: > >> case ICPT_IOINST: > >> + case ICPT_KSS: > >> /* instruction only stored for these icptcodes */ > >> ilen = insn_length(vcpu->arch.sie_block->ipa >> 8); > >> /* Use the length of the EXECUTE instruction if necessary */ > >> @@ -565,7 +566,44 @@ int kvm_handle_sie_intercept(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > >> rc = handle_partial_execution(vcpu); > >> break; > >> case ICPT_KSS: > >> - rc = kvm_s390_skey_check_enable(vcpu); > >> + if (!test_kvm_facility(vcpu->kvm, 169)) { > >> + rc = kvm_s390_skey_check_enable(vcpu); > >> + } else { > > > > <bikeshed>Introduce a helper function? This is getting a bit hard to > > read.</bikeshed> > > > >> + /* > >> + * Storage key removal facility emulation. > >> + * > >> + * KSS is the same priority as an instruction > >> + * interception. Hence we need handling here > >> + * and in the instruction emulation code. > >> + * > >> + * KSS is nullifying (no psw forward), SKRF > >> + * issues suppressing SPECIAL OPS, so we need > >> + * to forward by hand. > >> + */ > >> + switch (vcpu->arch.sie_block->ipa) { > >> + case 0xb2b2: > >> + kvm_s390_forward_psw(vcpu, kvm_s390_get_ilen(vcpu)); > >> + rc = kvm_s390_handle_b2(vcpu); > >> + break; > >> + case 0x8200: > > > > Can we have speaking names? I can only guess that this is an lpsw... > > You can only guess from the kvm_s390_handle_lpsw() call below? ;-) > > I'd be happy to put this into an own function and add some comments to > the cases where we lack them. However, I don't really want to define > constants for speaking names. Well, I can guess the lpsw here :) but not the b2b2 above. Maybe add a comment like /* handle lpsw/lpswe */? > > > > >> + kvm_s390_forward_psw(vcpu, kvm_s390_get_ilen(vcpu)); > >> + rc = kvm_s390_handle_lpsw(vcpu); > >> + break; > >> + case 0: > >> + /* > >> + * Interception caused by a key in a > >> + * exception new PSW mask. The guest > >> + * PSW has already been updated to the > >> + * non-valid PSW so we only need to > >> + * inject a PGM. > >> + */ > >> + rc = kvm_s390_inject_program_int(vcpu, PGM_SPECIFICATION); > >> + break; > >> + default: > >> + kvm_s390_forward_psw(vcpu, kvm_s390_get_ilen(vcpu)); > >> + rc = kvm_s390_inject_program_int(vcpu, PGM_SPECIAL_OPERATION); > >> + } > >> + } > >> break; > >> case ICPT_MCHKREQ: > >> case ICPT_INT_ENABLE: > > > >
Attachment:
pgpWWYUyqyHYz.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature