From: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>
To: Eric Farman <farman@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: Farhan Ali <alifm@linux.ibm.com>,
Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>,
Pierre Morel <pmorel@linux.ibm.com>,
linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/7] s390: vfio-ccw fixes
Date: Wed, 15 May 2019 14:45:30 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190515144530.5603097b.cohuck@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190514234248.36203-1-farman@linux.ibm.com>
On Wed, 15 May 2019 01:42:41 +0200
Eric Farman <farman@linux.ibm.com> wrote:
> The attached are a few fixes to the vfio-ccw kernel code for potential
> errors or architecture anomalies. Under normal usage, and even most
> abnormal usage, they don't expose any problems to a well-behaved guest
> and its devices. But, they are deficiencies just the same and could
> cause some weird behavior if they ever popped up in real life.
>
> I have tried to arrange these patches in a "solves a noticeable problem
> with existing workloads" to "solves a theoretical problem with
> hypothetical workloads" order. This way, the bigger ones at the end
> can be discussed without impeding the smaller and more impactful ones
> at the start.
>
> Per the conversations on patch 7, the last several patches remain
> unchanged. They continue to buid an IDAL for each CCW, and only pin
> guest pages and assign the resulting addresses to IDAWs if they are
> expected to cause a data transfer. This will avoid sending an
> unmodified guest address, which may be invalid but anyway is not mapped
> to the same host address, in the IDAL sent to the channel subsystem and
> any unexpected behavior that may result.
>
> They are based on 5.1.0, not Conny's vfio-ccw tree even though there are
> some good fixes pending for 5.2 there. I've run this series both with
> and without that code, but couldn't decide which base would provide an
> easier time applying patches. "I think" they should apply fine to both,
> but I apologize in advance if I guessed wrong! :)
They also should apply on current master, no? My 5.2 branch should be
all merged by now :)
Nothing really jumped out at me; I'm happy to queue the patches if I
get some more feedback.
>
>
> Changelog:
> v1 -> v2:
> - Patch 1:
> - [Cornelia] Added a code comment about why we update the SCSW when
> we've gone past the end of the chain for normal, successful, I/O
> - Patch 2:
> - [Cornelia] Cleaned up the cc info in the commit message
> - [Pierre] Added r-b
> - Patch 3:
> - [Cornelia] Update the return code information in prologue of
> pfn_array_pin(), and then only call vfio_unpin_pages() if we
> pinned anything, rather than silently creating an error
> (this last bit was mentioned on patch 6, but applied here)
> - [Eric] Clean up the error exit in pfn_array_pin()
> - Patch 4-7 unchanged
>
> Eric Farman (7):
> s390/cio: Update SCSW if it points to the end of the chain
> s390/cio: Set vfio-ccw FSM state before ioeventfd
> s390/cio: Split pfn_array_alloc_pin into pieces
> s390/cio: Initialize the host addresses in pfn_array
> s390/cio: Allow zero-length CCWs in vfio-ccw
> s390/cio: Don't pin vfio pages for empty transfers
> s390/cio: Remove vfio-ccw checks of command codes
>
> drivers/s390/cio/vfio_ccw_cp.c | 159 +++++++++++++++++++++++---------
> drivers/s390/cio/vfio_ccw_drv.c | 6 +-
> 2 files changed, 119 insertions(+), 46 deletions(-)
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-05-15 12:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-05-14 23:42 [PATCH v2 0/7] s390: vfio-ccw fixes Eric Farman
2019-05-14 23:42 ` [PATCH v2 1/7] s390/cio: Update SCSW if it points to the end of the chain Eric Farman
2019-05-15 14:30 ` Farhan Ali
2019-05-14 23:42 ` [PATCH v2 2/7] s390/cio: Set vfio-ccw FSM state before ioeventfd Eric Farman
2019-05-15 14:36 ` Farhan Ali
2019-05-14 23:42 ` [PATCH v2 3/7] s390/cio: Split pfn_array_alloc_pin into pieces Eric Farman
2019-05-15 16:04 ` Farhan Ali
2019-05-14 23:42 ` [PATCH v2 4/7] s390/cio: Initialize the host addresses in pfn_array Eric Farman
2019-05-15 16:25 ` Farhan Ali
2019-05-14 23:42 ` [PATCH v2 5/7] s390/cio: Allow zero-length CCWs in vfio-ccw Eric Farman
2019-05-15 12:23 ` Cornelia Huck
2019-05-15 15:04 ` Eric Farman
2019-05-15 20:08 ` Farhan Ali
2019-05-16 9:59 ` Cornelia Huck
2019-05-16 10:48 ` Eric Farman
2019-05-14 23:42 ` [PATCH v2 6/7] s390/cio: Don't pin vfio pages for empty transfers Eric Farman
2019-05-14 23:42 ` [PATCH v2 7/7] s390/cio: Remove vfio-ccw checks of command codes Eric Farman
2019-05-15 12:43 ` Cornelia Huck
2019-05-15 13:36 ` Eric Farman
2019-05-15 13:42 ` Cornelia Huck
2019-05-15 12:45 ` Cornelia Huck [this message]
2019-05-15 13:21 ` [PATCH v2 0/7] s390: vfio-ccw fixes Eric Farman
2019-05-16 11:44 ` Cornelia Huck
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=20190515144530.5603097b.cohuck@redhat.com \
--to=cohuck@redhat.com \
--cc=alifm@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=farman@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pasic@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=pmorel@linux.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox