From: Collin Walling <walling@linux.ibm.com>
To: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>, David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
Cc: pbonzini@redhat.com, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org,
schwidefsky@de.ibm.com, heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com,
borntraeger@de.ibm.com, frankja@linux.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] s390/setup: diag318: remove bit check and refactor struct
Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2019 10:22:38 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <bce6e8cf-6f45-7549-8ada-ba4f77059487@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190403143333.2a3db681.cohuck@redhat.com>
On 4/3/19 8:33 AM, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> On Wed, 3 Apr 2019 14:03:21 +0200
> David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> On 02.04.19 19:46, Collin Walling wrote:
>>> Execution of DIAGNOSE 0x318 is fenced by checking an SCLP bit
>>> for the availability of hardware support for the instruction.
>>>
>>> In order to support this instruction for a KVM/QEMU guest, we
>>> would need to provide modifications to the SCLP Read SCP Info
>>> data, which will in turn reduce the maximum number of CPUs that
>>> may be provided to the guest. This issue introduces compatability
>>> and legacy concerns.
>>>
>>> Let's circumvent this issue by removing the bit check and blindly
>>> executing the instruction. An exception table rule is in place to
>>> catch the case where hardware does not support this instruction.
>>>
>>> While we're at it, let's condense the version code fields in the
>>> diag318_info struct until we can determine how it will be used.
>>>
>>> This modifies commit 4ad78b8651aacf26b3ab6d1e784952eb70469c43
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Collin Walling <walling@linux.ibm.com>
>>> ---
>>> arch/s390/include/asm/diag.h | 6 ++----
>>> arch/s390/kernel/setup.c | 12 ++++++------
>>> 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/s390/include/asm/diag.h b/arch/s390/include/asm/diag.h
>>> index 19562be22b7e..215516284175 100644
>>> --- a/arch/s390/include/asm/diag.h
>>> +++ b/arch/s390/include/asm/diag.h
>>> @@ -298,10 +298,8 @@ struct diag26c_mac_resp {
>>> union diag318_info {
>>> unsigned long val;
>>> struct {
>>> - unsigned int cpnc : 8;
>>> - unsigned int cpvc_linux : 24;
>>> - unsigned char cpvc_distro[3];
>>> - unsigned char zero;
>>> + unsigned long cpnc : 8;
>>> + unsigned long cpvc : 56;
>
> That part looks reasonable (we don't have a proper convention yet, have
> we?)
>
>>> };
>>> };
>>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/s390/kernel/setup.c b/arch/s390/kernel/setup.c
>>> index 2c642af526ce..fe70201f8b5d 100644
>>> --- a/arch/s390/kernel/setup.c
>>> +++ b/arch/s390/kernel/setup.c
>>> @@ -1011,15 +1011,15 @@ static void __init setup_control_program_code(void)
>>> {
>>> union diag318_info diag318_info = {
>>> .cpnc = CPNC_LINUX,
>>> - .cpvc_linux = 0,
>>> - .cpvc_distro = {0},
>>> + .cpvc = 0,
>>> };
>>>
>>> - if (!sclp.has_diag318)
>>> - return;
>>> -
>>> diag_stat_inc(DIAG_STAT_X318);
>>> - asm volatile("diag %0,0,0x318\n" : : "d" (diag318_info.val));
>>> + asm volatile(
>>> + " diag %0,0,0x318\n"
>>> + "0: nopr %%r7\n"
>>> + EX_TABLE(0b,0b)
>>> + : : "d" (diag318_info.val));
>>> }
>>>
>>> /*
>>>
>>
>> That smells like a nasty hack to not expose new features in QEMU and
>> deal with the issue of handling CPU limits. No, I don't like this.
>>
>> Fix QEMU, not the kernel.
>>
>
> I agree. The compat handling is a bit annoying, but I don't think we
> can get around it.
>
Thanks for the feedback, everyone.
The consensus here is to keep the bit check, so I'll throw that back in.
I'll squeeze in a "clean-up" patch for the diag318_info struct in v4.
I'll see that QEMU 4.1 has a max cpu limit of at most 247 (one less than
the current max). If anyone has a suggestion on a better limit
(Christian mentioned 240), please let me know. Otherwise we can discuss
that value in the next version.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-04-03 14:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-04-02 17:46 [PATCH v3 0/2] Use DIAG318 to set Control Program Name & Version Codes Collin Walling
2019-04-02 17:46 ` [PATCH v3 1/2] s390/setup: diag318: remove bit check and refactor struct Collin Walling
2019-04-03 6:36 ` Janosch Frank
2019-04-03 11:28 ` Christian Borntraeger
2019-04-03 12:09 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-04-03 12:10 ` Christian Borntraeger
2019-04-03 12:03 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-04-03 12:33 ` Cornelia Huck
2019-04-03 14:22 ` Collin Walling [this message]
2019-04-02 17:46 ` [PATCH v3 2/2] s390/kvm: diagnose 318 handling Collin Walling
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=bce6e8cf-6f45-7549-8ada-ba4f77059487@linux.ibm.com \
--to=walling@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=borntraeger@de.ibm.com \
--cc=cohuck@redhat.com \
--cc=david@redhat.com \
--cc=frankja@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=schwidefsky@de.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).