From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC 00/19] KVM: s390/crypto/vfio: guest dedicated crypto
 adapters
Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2017 10:49:09 +0100
Message-ID: <20171117104909.799e0fd4.cohuck@redhat.com>
References: <1507916344-3896-1-git-send-email-akrowiak@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
        <5baf5f90-6cac-3c09-7b66-1bc8b30b8093@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
        <20171114145722.4ab850a5.cohuck@redhat.com>
        <fcfd6a27-662b-9a30-8bad-adaac4cf0ce1@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
        <20171116174916.3d3afa9a.cohuck@redhat.com>
        <cc173ca0-fadf-117a-7092-690d31352c7c@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <cc173ca0-fadf-117a-7092-690d31352c7c@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-Archive: <https://lore.kernel.org/kvm/>
List-Post: <mailto:kvm@vger.kernel.org>
To: Tony Krowiak <akrowiak@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, freude@de.ibm.com, schwidefsky@de.ibm.com, heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com, borntraeger@de.ibm.com, kwankhede@nvidia.com, bjsdjshi@linux.vnet.ibm.com, pbonzini@redhat.com, alex.williamson@redhat.com, pmorel@linux.vnet.ibm.com, alifm@linux.vnet.ibm.com, mjrosato@linux.vnet.ibm.com, qemu-s390x@nongnu.org, jjherne@linux.vnet.ibm.com, thuth@redhat.com, pasic@linux.vnet.ibm.com
List-ID: <linux-s390.vger.kernel.org>

On Thu, 16 Nov 2017 18:41:29 -0500
Tony Krowiak <akrowiak@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:

> On 11/16/2017 11:49 AM, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> > On Thu, 16 Nov 2017 10:23:25 -0500
> > Tony Krowiak <akrowiak@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> >  
> >> On 11/14/2017 08:57 AM, Cornelia Huck wrote:  
> >>> On Tue, 31 Oct 2017 15:39:09 -0400
> >>> Tony Krowiak <akrowiak@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> >>>     
> >>>> On 10/13/2017 01:38 PM, Tony Krowiak wrote:
> >>>> Ping  
> >>>>> Tony Krowiak (19):
> >>>>>      KVM: s390: SIE considerations for AP Queue virtualization
> >>>>>      KVM: s390: refactor crypto initialization
> >>>>>      s390/zcrypt: new AP matrix bus
> >>>>>      s390/zcrypt: create an AP matrix device on the AP matrix bus
> >>>>>      s390/zcrypt: base implementation of AP matrix device driver
> >>>>>      s390/zcrypt: register matrix device with VFIO mediated device
> >>>>>        framework
> >>>>>      KVM: s390: introduce AP matrix configuration interface
> >>>>>      s390/zcrypt: support for assigning adapters to matrix mdev
> >>>>>      s390/zcrypt: validate adapter assignment
> >>>>>      s390/zcrypt: sysfs interfaces supporting AP domain assignment
> >>>>>      s390/zcrypt: validate domain assignment
> >>>>>      s390/zcrypt: sysfs support for control domain assignment
> >>>>>      s390/zcrypt: validate control domain assignment
> >>>>>      KVM: s390: Connect the AP mediated matrix device to KVM
> >>>>>      s390/zcrypt: introduce ioctl access to VFIO AP Matrix driver
> >>>>>      KVM: s390: interface to configure KVM guest's AP matrix
> >>>>>      KVM: s390: validate input to AP matrix config interface
> >>>>>      KVM: s390: New ioctl to configure KVM guest's AP matrix
> >>>>>      s390/facilities: enable AP facilities needed by guest  
> >>> I think the approach is fine, and the code also looks fine for the most
> >>> part. Some comments:
> >>>
> >>> - various patches can be squashed together to give a better
> >>>     understanding at a glance  
> >> Which patches would you squash?  
> > See the patches. As a rule, I find it more sensible to introduce
> > interface + implementation together rather than separate.  
> The only patch that introduces an interface separate from the implementation
> is patch7:
> 
> 	KVM: s390: introduce AP matrix configuration interface
> 
> I've squashed that with patch8, s390/zcrypt: support for assigning adapters to matrix mdev

Sounds good!