From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com [148.163.158.5]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 18B6D2F0C6F; Wed, 29 Oct 2025 16:32:56 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=148.163.158.5 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1761755578; cv=none; b=U8EMeL2Sp7JzP5xvS+2Kc2QqKS8SOWXm/Cbl56iyYSn4MTF91l6IKlx36W6TngE53MX9RoUS8jm3jkzm/T07rJX2i4BYKSUubpmyt8bO1Y8e7rS+IkLx3AqidNAGNH4J5nXFVcYWdWb8bgsp+Bt1YnmT0uebr3j9yP/hDALakZw= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1761755578; c=relaxed/simple; bh=7IQeSGwPOqTO7jWGk962mBxUJYCy7pPJe+iho7a0ghE=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=RaoxeQZG4cglWcaQ/LfcLVV4BSgtwTZ7JSLXXeRGVfsEZrhjh6+rFNku9sb0fA/fdVw8pdMIywEoBth+VejjhgYkSh+3vBoDzPuBYEP4DpY6y00eZc28Xo5PceYm4+mMyvJdNJ5j7VGGUCnEu0S1v/zIX+OObhqtjEWoUZwG3Nw= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.ibm.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.ibm.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=ibm.com header.i=@ibm.com header.b=tniaFuJp; arc=none smtp.client-ip=148.163.158.5 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.ibm.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.ibm.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=ibm.com header.i=@ibm.com header.b="tniaFuJp" Received: from pps.filterd (m0356516.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.18.1.2/8.18.1.2) with ESMTP id 59TC2Dp3026032; Wed, 29 Oct 2025 16:32:56 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ibm.com; h=cc :content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to; s=pp1; bh=14YbyJ fLp/xusokbv9KzpdzRIDFWEkavJbiiTdXNqjQ=; b=tniaFuJpdVbjgnCNxniOAl t2qRDtGlEsRiJlrLzlV+4BYbRVyxQuM/d7FVsS/igCDHLr7g2d/LsPur4zYxyxyM YDQSSIOIqK+plMAQI6TS1pXpHH0er5Xl5YWNgWOasJoYYRzvhfnQ+f4wNs3yWjGQ YJtPJN0gOup7OF2XLCQjxHDN4tG8ao9TE5ldNZYDw5CdAp+OjLbUPequjVkeayH7 PTcjiU/G+mQszZtOiDAJ8SmbkjYnvSVyuzFBqcbYkVWwIv38FeVwjfMpfAE52sZJ w7KTv9wZZQtIjzqQjPL8N1aVwmymW1H+V9fR/VDjEGC3tQ6yiomd/3HtHtHELHjA == Received: from ppma23.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com (5d.69.3da9.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [169.61.105.93]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 4a34aam8sg-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 29 Oct 2025 16:32:55 +0000 (GMT) Received: from pps.filterd (ppma23.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma23.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com (8.18.1.2/8.18.1.2) with ESMTP id 59TDcHWg030714; Wed, 29 Oct 2025 16:32:55 GMT Received: from smtprelay06.fra02v.mail.ibm.com ([9.218.2.230]) by ppma23.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 4a33wwmcc4-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 29 Oct 2025 16:32:55 +0000 Received: from smtpav04.fra02v.mail.ibm.com (smtpav04.fra02v.mail.ibm.com [10.20.54.103]) by smtprelay06.fra02v.mail.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 59TGWpD716318838 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 29 Oct 2025 16:32:51 GMT Received: from smtpav04.fra02v.mail.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 260D12004B; Wed, 29 Oct 2025 16:32:51 +0000 (GMT) Received: from smtpav04.fra02v.mail.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3B1620043; Wed, 29 Oct 2025 16:32:50 +0000 (GMT) Received: from [9.111.53.31] (unknown [9.111.53.31]) by smtpav04.fra02v.mail.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Wed, 29 Oct 2025 16:32:50 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: <1d167707-c946-46d7-8a12-a97b4a31a0ec@linux.ibm.com> Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2025 17:32:50 +0100 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: s390: Add capability that forwards operation exceptions To: Janosch Frank , kvm@vger.kernel.org Cc: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, imbrenda@linux.ibm.com References: <20251029130744.6422-1-frankja@linux.ibm.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Christian Borntraeger In-Reply-To: <20251029130744.6422-1-frankja@linux.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.4 cv=ALkgKXG8 c=1 sm=1 tr=0 ts=690241b7 cx=c_pps a=3Bg1Hr4SwmMryq2xdFQyZA==:117 a=3Bg1Hr4SwmMryq2xdFQyZA==:17 a=IkcTkHD0fZMA:10 a=x6icFKpwvdMA:10 a=VkNPw1HP01LnGYTKEx00:22 a=VnNF1IyMAAAA:8 a=R39a7-YhG-dWXkH9HqAA:9 a=QEXdDO2ut3YA:10 X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: UsFpsk1XddFCUdFeRQVY5Vo_OeOCj7yy X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details-Enc: AW1haW4tMjUxMDI4MDE2NiBTYWx0ZWRfX+MXdqiUOlQK+ 0UqQSuk7H4aUMG3eZy2lTDli9GUyn64sXtZHJ4Dmf3gwCtOqXGe69IZ4XtYe6wva2L7k496MpdH hND2Ba8F/R9/foy8b5EoXwwi2R4FFTYn5uR5N9WzNW/XbECGnCYKxPC1iWRN9SVfFRgF3QyxhWu QhOzkZLYLP+VNQ8zfopyyaE8VI6w/XEZLuY0BYvkLoGlNWYXTkDMaAh3IX3ef9o+OpFpPbxuTNj l9IVeIQa04fzH0GUvV8C05nFsSTMRj1pUa+GZM9ZsS/4Vs+2h22LMmgBExuzJbcfoNy6WTFb+mB N4O7ZYBpHYXFuvPEnqrjfbM4wqUQlIezfbzJQPwF4FEP/71x05YuXWMFIiPuclTzVgUHoby4lNp qOxWLa0ONoWiVWfFEUHlBbZAma+5NA== X-Proofpoint-GUID: UsFpsk1XddFCUdFeRQVY5Vo_OeOCj7yy X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.293,Aquarius:18.0.1121,Hydra:6.1.9,FMLib:17.12.100.49 definitions=2025-10-29_06,2025-10-29_03,2025-10-01_01 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 priorityscore=1501 suspectscore=0 impostorscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 clxscore=1015 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 spamscore=0 classifier=typeunknown authscore=0 authtc= authcc= route=outbound adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.19.0-2510240000 definitions=main-2510280166 Am 29.10.25 um 14:04 schrieb Janosch Frank: > Setting KVM_CAP_S390_USER_OPEREXEC will forward all operation > exceptions to user space. This also includes the 0x0000 instructions > managed by KVM_CAP_S390_USER_INSTR0. It's helpful if user space wants > to emulate instructions which do not (yet) have an opcode. > > While we're at it refine the documentation for > KVM_CAP_S390_USER_INSTR0. An alternative would be to add a flag to KVM_CAP_S390_USER_INSTR0, but I am not sure if this has any real benefit or downside.> > Signed-off-by: Janosch Frank But this looks good, Acked-by: Christian Borntraeger