From: cohuck at redhat.com (Cornelia Huck)
Subject: [PATCH 8/9] KVM: s390: Do not report unusabled IDs via KVM_CAP_MAX_VCPU_ID
Date: Fri, 24 May 2019 11:13:23 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190524111323.656afbff.cohuck@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190523164309.13345-9-thuth@redhat.com>
On Thu, 23 May 2019 18:43:08 +0200
Thomas Huth <thuth at redhat.com> wrote:
In the subject: s/unusabled/unusable/
> KVM_CAP_MAX_VCPU_ID is currently always reporting KVM_MAX_VCPU_ID on all
> architectures. However, on s390x, the amount of usable CPUs is determined
> during runtime - it is depending on the features of the machine the code
> is running on. Since we are using the vcpu_id as an index into the SCA
> structures that are defined by the hardware (see e.g. the sca_add_vcpu()
> function), it is not only the amount of CPUs that is limited by the hard-
> ware, but also the range of IDs that we can use.
> Thus KVM_CAP_MAX_VCPU_ID must be determined during runtime on s390x, too.
> So the handling of KVM_CAP_MAX_VCPU_ID has to be moved from the common
> code into the architecture specific code, and on s390x we have to return
> the same value here as for KVM_CAP_MAX_VCPUS.
> This problem has been discovered with the kvm_create_max_vcpus selftest.
> With this change applied, the selftest now passes on s390x, too.
>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Huth <thuth at redhat.com>
> ---
> arch/mips/kvm/mips.c | 3 +++
> arch/powerpc/kvm/powerpc.c | 3 +++
> arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c | 1 +
> arch/x86/kvm/x86.c | 3 +++
> virt/kvm/arm/arm.c | 3 +++
> virt/kvm/kvm_main.c | 2 --
> 6 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
Reviewed-by: Cornelia Huck <cohuck at redhat.com>
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: cohuck@redhat.com (Cornelia Huck)
Subject: [PATCH 8/9] KVM: s390: Do not report unusabled IDs via KVM_CAP_MAX_VCPU_ID
Date: Fri, 24 May 2019 11:13:23 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190524111323.656afbff.cohuck@redhat.com> (raw)
Message-ID: <20190524091323.S-hc_T0_4e3ft0EdjSbd3TCoU968MN3l76_x3LvUt_w@z> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190523164309.13345-9-thuth@redhat.com>
On Thu, 23 May 2019 18:43:08 +0200
Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> wrote:
In the subject: s/unusabled/unusable/
> KVM_CAP_MAX_VCPU_ID is currently always reporting KVM_MAX_VCPU_ID on all
> architectures. However, on s390x, the amount of usable CPUs is determined
> during runtime - it is depending on the features of the machine the code
> is running on. Since we are using the vcpu_id as an index into the SCA
> structures that are defined by the hardware (see e.g. the sca_add_vcpu()
> function), it is not only the amount of CPUs that is limited by the hard-
> ware, but also the range of IDs that we can use.
> Thus KVM_CAP_MAX_VCPU_ID must be determined during runtime on s390x, too.
> So the handling of KVM_CAP_MAX_VCPU_ID has to be moved from the common
> code into the architecture specific code, and on s390x we have to return
> the same value here as for KVM_CAP_MAX_VCPUS.
> This problem has been discovered with the kvm_create_max_vcpus selftest.
> With this change applied, the selftest now passes on s390x, too.
>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Huth <thuth at redhat.com>
> ---
> arch/mips/kvm/mips.c | 3 +++
> arch/powerpc/kvm/powerpc.c | 3 +++
> arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c | 1 +
> arch/x86/kvm/x86.c | 3 +++
> virt/kvm/arm/arm.c | 3 +++
> virt/kvm/kvm_main.c | 2 --
> 6 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
Reviewed-by: Cornelia Huck <cohuck at redhat.com>
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>
To: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com>
Cc: "Christian Borntraeger" <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>,
"Janosch Frank" <frankja@linux.ibm.com>,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, "Paolo Bonzini" <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
"Radim Krčmář" <rkrcmar@redhat.com>,
"Shuah Khan" <shuah@kernel.org>,
"David Hildenbrand" <david@redhat.com>,
"Andrew Jones" <drjones@redhat.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org,
linux-s390@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 8/9] KVM: s390: Do not report unusabled IDs via KVM_CAP_MAX_VCPU_ID
Date: Fri, 24 May 2019 11:13:23 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190524111323.656afbff.cohuck@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190523164309.13345-9-thuth@redhat.com>
On Thu, 23 May 2019 18:43:08 +0200
Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> wrote:
In the subject: s/unusabled/unusable/
> KVM_CAP_MAX_VCPU_ID is currently always reporting KVM_MAX_VCPU_ID on all
> architectures. However, on s390x, the amount of usable CPUs is determined
> during runtime - it is depending on the features of the machine the code
> is running on. Since we are using the vcpu_id as an index into the SCA
> structures that are defined by the hardware (see e.g. the sca_add_vcpu()
> function), it is not only the amount of CPUs that is limited by the hard-
> ware, but also the range of IDs that we can use.
> Thus KVM_CAP_MAX_VCPU_ID must be determined during runtime on s390x, too.
> So the handling of KVM_CAP_MAX_VCPU_ID has to be moved from the common
> code into the architecture specific code, and on s390x we have to return
> the same value here as for KVM_CAP_MAX_VCPUS.
> This problem has been discovered with the kvm_create_max_vcpus selftest.
> With this change applied, the selftest now passes on s390x, too.
>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com>
> ---
> arch/mips/kvm/mips.c | 3 +++
> arch/powerpc/kvm/powerpc.c | 3 +++
> arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c | 1 +
> arch/x86/kvm/x86.c | 3 +++
> virt/kvm/arm/arm.c | 3 +++
> virt/kvm/kvm_main.c | 2 --
> 6 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
Reviewed-by: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-05-24 9:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 108+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-05-23 16:43 [PATCH v1 0/9] KVM selftests for s390x thuth
2019-05-23 16:43 ` Thomas Huth
2019-05-23 16:43 ` Thomas Huth
2019-05-23 16:43 ` [PATCH 1/9] KVM: selftests: Wrap vcpu_nested_state_get/set functions with x86 guard thuth
2019-05-23 16:43 ` Thomas Huth
2019-05-23 16:43 ` Thomas Huth
2019-05-23 16:43 ` [PATCH 2/9] KVM: selftests: Guard struct kvm_vcpu_events with __KVM_HAVE_VCPU_EVENTS thuth
2019-05-23 16:43 ` Thomas Huth
2019-05-23 16:43 ` Thomas Huth
2019-05-23 17:57 ` drjones
2019-05-23 17:57 ` Andrew Jones
2019-05-23 17:57 ` Andrew Jones
2019-05-23 16:43 ` [PATCH 3/9] kvm: selftests: aarch64: fix default vm mode thuth
2019-05-23 16:43 ` Thomas Huth
2019-05-23 16:43 ` Thomas Huth
2019-05-24 8:37 ` borntraeger
2019-05-24 8:37 ` Christian Borntraeger
2019-05-24 8:37 ` Christian Borntraeger
2019-05-23 16:43 ` [PATCH 4/9] KVM: selftests: Introduce a VM_MODE_DEFAULT macro for the default bits thuth
2019-05-23 16:43 ` Thomas Huth
2019-05-23 16:43 ` Thomas Huth
2019-05-23 17:20 ` drjones
2019-05-23 17:20 ` Andrew Jones
2019-05-23 17:20 ` Andrew Jones
2019-05-23 16:43 ` [PATCH 5/9] KVM: selftests: Align memory region addresses to 1M on s390x thuth
2019-05-23 16:43 ` Thomas Huth
2019-05-23 16:43 ` Thomas Huth
2019-05-23 17:40 ` drjones
2019-05-23 17:40 ` Andrew Jones
2019-05-23 17:40 ` Andrew Jones
2019-05-24 8:29 ` borntraeger
2019-05-24 8:29 ` Christian Borntraeger
2019-05-24 8:29 ` Christian Borntraeger
2019-05-24 18:17 ` thuth
2019-05-24 18:17 ` Thomas Huth
2019-05-24 18:17 ` Thomas Huth
2019-05-23 16:43 ` [PATCH 6/9] KVM: selftests: Add processor code for s390x thuth
2019-05-23 16:43 ` Thomas Huth
2019-05-23 16:43 ` Thomas Huth
2019-05-23 16:43 ` [PATCH 7/9] KVM: selftests: Add the sync_regs test " thuth
2019-05-23 16:43 ` Thomas Huth
2019-05-23 16:43 ` Thomas Huth
2019-05-23 16:43 ` [PATCH 8/9] KVM: s390: Do not report unusabled IDs via KVM_CAP_MAX_VCPU_ID thuth
2019-05-23 16:43 ` Thomas Huth
2019-05-23 16:43 ` Thomas Huth
2019-05-23 17:56 ` drjones
2019-05-23 17:56 ` Andrew Jones
2019-05-23 17:56 ` Andrew Jones
2019-05-24 9:13 ` cohuck [this message]
2019-05-24 9:13 ` Cornelia Huck
2019-05-24 9:13 ` Cornelia Huck
2019-05-24 9:16 ` david
2019-05-24 9:16 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-05-24 9:16 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-05-28 11:00 ` borntraeger
2019-05-28 11:00 ` Christian Borntraeger
2019-05-28 11:00 ` Christian Borntraeger
2019-05-28 12:53 ` cohuck
2019-05-28 12:53 ` Cornelia Huck
2019-05-28 12:53 ` Cornelia Huck
2019-05-28 13:48 ` borntraeger
2019-05-28 13:48 ` Christian Borntraeger
2019-05-28 13:48 ` Christian Borntraeger
2019-05-23 16:43 ` [PATCH 9/9] KVM: selftests: Move kvm_create_max_vcpus test to generic code thuth
2019-05-23 16:43 ` Thomas Huth
2019-05-23 16:43 ` Thomas Huth
2019-05-23 17:56 ` drjones
2019-05-23 17:56 ` Andrew Jones
2019-05-23 17:56 ` Andrew Jones
2019-05-24 9:16 ` david
2019-05-24 9:16 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-05-24 9:16 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-05-24 10:33 ` [PATCH] KVM: selftests: enable pgste option for the linker on s390 borntraeger
2019-05-24 10:33 ` Christian Borntraeger
2019-05-24 10:33 ` Christian Borntraeger
2019-05-24 18:16 ` thuth
2019-05-24 18:16 ` Thomas Huth
2019-05-24 18:16 ` Thomas Huth
2019-05-24 19:07 ` david
2019-05-24 19:07 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-05-24 19:07 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-05-27 11:44 ` borntraeger
2019-05-27 11:44 ` Christian Borntraeger
2019-05-27 11:44 ` Christian Borntraeger
2019-05-24 11:11 ` [PATCH v1 0/9] KVM selftests for s390x borntraeger
2019-05-24 11:11 ` Christian Borntraeger
2019-05-24 11:11 ` Christian Borntraeger
2019-05-24 12:17 ` borntraeger
2019-05-24 12:17 ` Christian Borntraeger
2019-05-24 12:17 ` Christian Borntraeger
2019-05-24 12:29 ` borntraeger
2019-05-24 12:29 ` Christian Borntraeger
2019-05-24 12:29 ` Christian Borntraeger
2019-05-24 12:36 ` david
2019-05-24 12:36 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-05-24 12:36 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-05-24 12:56 ` borntraeger
2019-05-24 12:56 ` Christian Borntraeger
2019-05-24 12:56 ` Christian Borntraeger
2019-05-24 18:33 ` borntraeger
2019-05-24 18:33 ` Christian Borntraeger
2019-05-24 18:33 ` Christian Borntraeger
2019-06-04 17:19 ` pbonzini
2019-06-04 17:19 ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-06-04 17:19 ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-06-04 17:37 ` borntraeger
2019-06-04 17:37 ` Christian Borntraeger
2019-06-04 17:37 ` Christian Borntraeger
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=20190524111323.656afbff.cohuck@redhat.com \
--to=unknown@example.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.