All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Paul Mackerras <paulus@ozlabs.org>
To: Bharata B Rao <bharata@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, paulus@au1.ibm.com, benh@linux.ibm.com,
	aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com, jglisse@redhat.com,
	linuxram@us.ibm.com, sukadev@linux.vnet.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 3/4] kvmppc: H_SVM_INIT_START and H_SVM_INIT_DONE hcalls
Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2019 03:21:40 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190219032140.GA5353@blackberry> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190130060726.29958-4-bharata@linux.ibm.com>

On Wed, Jan 30, 2019 at 11:37:25AM +0530, Bharata B Rao wrote:
> H_SVM_INIT_START: Initiate securing a VM
> H_SVM_INIT_DONE: Conclude securing a VM
> 
> During early guest init, these hcalls will be issued by UV.
> As part of these hcalls, [un]register memslots with UV.

That last sentence is a bit misleading as it implies that
H_SVM_INIT_DONE causes us to unregister the memslots with the UV,
which is not the case.  Shouldn't it be "As part of H_SVM_INIT_START,
register all existing memslots with the UV"?

Also, do we subsequently communicate changes in the memslots to the
UV?

Paul.

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Paul Mackerras <paulus@ozlabs.org>
To: Bharata B Rao <bharata@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: linuxram@us.ibm.com, kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org, benh@linux.ibm.com,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, jglisse@redhat.com,
	aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com, paulus@au1.ibm.com,
	sukadev@linux.vnet.ibm.com, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 3/4] kvmppc: H_SVM_INIT_START and H_SVM_INIT_DONE hcalls
Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2019 14:21:40 +1100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190219032140.GA5353@blackberry> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190130060726.29958-4-bharata@linux.ibm.com>

On Wed, Jan 30, 2019 at 11:37:25AM +0530, Bharata B Rao wrote:
> H_SVM_INIT_START: Initiate securing a VM
> H_SVM_INIT_DONE: Conclude securing a VM
> 
> During early guest init, these hcalls will be issued by UV.
> As part of these hcalls, [un]register memslots with UV.

That last sentence is a bit misleading as it implies that
H_SVM_INIT_DONE causes us to unregister the memslots with the UV,
which is not the case.  Shouldn't it be "As part of H_SVM_INIT_START,
register all existing memslots with the UV"?

Also, do we subsequently communicate changes in the memslots to the
UV?

Paul.

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Paul Mackerras <paulus@ozlabs.org>
To: Bharata B Rao <bharata@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, paulus@au1.ibm.com, benh@linux.ibm.com,
	aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com, jglisse@redhat.com,
	linuxram@us.ibm.com, sukadev@linux.vnet.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 3/4] kvmppc: H_SVM_INIT_START and H_SVM_INIT_DONE hcalls
Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2019 14:21:40 +1100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190219032140.GA5353@blackberry> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190130060726.29958-4-bharata@linux.ibm.com>

On Wed, Jan 30, 2019 at 11:37:25AM +0530, Bharata B Rao wrote:
> H_SVM_INIT_START: Initiate securing a VM
> H_SVM_INIT_DONE: Conclude securing a VM
> 
> During early guest init, these hcalls will be issued by UV.
> As part of these hcalls, [un]register memslots with UV.

That last sentence is a bit misleading as it implies that
H_SVM_INIT_DONE causes us to unregister the memslots with the UV,
which is not the case.  Shouldn't it be "As part of H_SVM_INIT_START,
register all existing memslots with the UV"?

Also, do we subsequently communicate changes in the memslots to the
UV?

Paul.


  reply	other threads:[~2019-02-19  3:21 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-01-30  6:07 [RFC PATCH v3 0/4] kvmppc: HMM backend driver to manage pages of secure guest Bharata B Rao
2019-01-30  6:19 ` Bharata B Rao
2019-01-30  6:07 ` Bharata B Rao
2019-01-30  6:07 ` [RFC PATCH v3 1/4] " Bharata B Rao
2019-01-30  6:19   ` Bharata B Rao
2019-01-30  6:07   ` Bharata B Rao
2019-01-30  6:07 ` [RFC PATCH v3 2/4] kvmppc: Add support for shared pages in HMM driver Bharata B Rao
2019-01-30  6:19   ` Bharata B Rao
2019-01-30  6:07   ` Bharata B Rao
2019-01-30  6:07 ` [RFC PATCH v3 3/4] kvmppc: H_SVM_INIT_START and H_SVM_INIT_DONE hcalls Bharata B Rao
2019-01-30  6:19   ` Bharata B Rao
2019-01-30  6:07   ` Bharata B Rao
2019-02-19  3:21   ` Paul Mackerras [this message]
2019-02-19  3:21     ` Paul Mackerras
2019-02-19  3:21     ` Paul Mackerras
2019-02-19  3:37     ` Bharata B Rao
2019-02-19  3:49       ` Bharata B Rao
2019-02-19  3:37       ` Bharata B Rao
2019-01-30  6:07 ` [RFC PATCH v3 4/4] kvmppc: Handle memory plug/unplug to secure VM Bharata B Rao
2019-01-30  6:19   ` Bharata B Rao
2019-01-30  6:07   ` Bharata B Rao

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20190219032140.GA5353@blackberry \
    --to=paulus@ozlabs.org \
    --cc=aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=benh@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=bharata@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=jglisse@redhat.com \
    --cc=kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=linuxram@us.ibm.com \
    --cc=paulus@au1.ibm.com \
    --cc=sukadev@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.