Re: [PATCH 24/32] KVM: s390: intercept the rpcit instruction

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

 




On 12/7/21 21:57, Matthew Rosato wrote:
For faster handling of PCI translation refreshes, intercept in KVM
and call the associated handler.

Signed-off-by: Matthew Rosato <mjrosato@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
  arch/s390/kvm/pci.h  |  4 ++++
  arch/s390/kvm/priv.c | 41 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
  2 files changed, 45 insertions(+)

diff --git a/arch/s390/kvm/pci.h b/arch/s390/kvm/pci.h
index d252a631b693..3f96eff432aa 100644
--- a/arch/s390/kvm/pci.h
+++ b/arch/s390/kvm/pci.h
@@ -18,6 +18,10 @@
#define KVM_S390_PCI_DTSM_MASK 0x40 +#define KVM_S390_RPCIT_STAT_MASK 0xffffffff00ffffffUL
+#define KVM_S390_RPCIT_INS_RES (0x10 << 24)
+#define KVM_S390_RPCIT_ERR (0x28 << 24)
I

+
  struct zpci_gaite {
  	unsigned int gisa;
  	u8 gisc;
diff --git a/arch/s390/kvm/priv.c b/arch/s390/kvm/priv.c
index 417154b314a6..768ae92ecc59 100644
--- a/arch/s390/kvm/priv.c
+++ b/arch/s390/kvm/priv.c
@@ -29,6 +29,7 @@
  #include <asm/ap.h>
  #include "gaccess.h"
  #include "kvm-s390.h"
+#include "pci.h"
  #include "trace.h"
static int handle_ri(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
@@ -335,6 +336,44 @@ static int handle_rrbe(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
  	return 0;
  }
+static int handle_rpcit(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
+{
+	int reg1, reg2;
+	int rc;
+
+	if (vcpu->arch.sie_block->gpsw.mask & PSW_MASK_PSTATE)
+		return kvm_s390_inject_program_int(vcpu, PGM_PRIVILEGED_OP);
+
+	kvm_s390_get_regs_rre(vcpu, &reg1, &reg2);
+
I would prefer to take care of the interception immediately here

        fh = vcpu->run->s.regs.gprs[reg1] >> 32;
        if ((fh & aift.mdd) != 0)
                return -EOPNOTSUP

instead of doing it inside kvm_s390_pci_refresh_trans.
It would simplify in my opinion.

+	rc = kvm_s390_pci_refresh_trans(vcpu, vcpu->run->s.regs.gprs[reg1],
+					vcpu->run->s.regs.gprs[reg2],
+					vcpu->run->s.regs.gprs[reg2+1]);
+

+	switch (rc) {
+	case 0:
+		kvm_s390_set_psw_cc(vcpu, 0);
+		break;
+	case -EOPNOTSUPP:
+		return -EOPNOTSUPP;
+	case -EINVAL:
+		kvm_s390_set_psw_cc(vcpu, 3);
+		break;
+	case -ENOMEM:
+		vcpu->run->s.regs.gprs[reg1] &= KVM_S390_RPCIT_STAT_MASK;
+		vcpu->run->s.regs.gprs[reg1] |= KVM_S390_RPCIT_INS_RES;
+		kvm_s390_set_psw_cc(vcpu, 1);
+		break;
+	default:
+		vcpu->run->s.regs.gprs[reg1] &= KVM_S390_RPCIT_STAT_MASK;
+		vcpu->run->s.regs.gprs[reg1] |= KVM_S390_RPCIT_ERR;
I think you should use the status reported by the hardware, reporting 
"Error recovery in progress" what ever the hardware error was does not 
seem right.
+		kvm_s390_set_psw_cc(vcpu, 1);
+		break;
+	}
NIT: This switch above could be much more simple if you set CC after the 
switch.
+
+	return 0;
+}
+
  #define SSKE_NQ 0x8
  #define SSKE_MR 0x4
  #define SSKE_MC 0x2
@@ -1275,6 +1314,8 @@ int kvm_s390_handle_b9(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
  		return handle_essa(vcpu);
  	case 0xaf:
  		return handle_pfmf(vcpu);
+	case 0xd3:
+		return handle_rpcit(vcpu);
  	default:
  		return -EOPNOTSUPP;
  	}





--
Pierre Morel
IBM Lab Boeblingen



[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