From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Date: Thu, 9 May 2019 20:30:28 +0200 From: Halil Pasic Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/10] virtio/s390: use DMA memory for ccw I/O and classic notifiers In-Reply-To: References: <20190426183245.37939-1-pasic@linux.ibm.com> <20190426183245.37939-10-pasic@linux.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Message-Id: <20190509203028.5b75eaa2.pasic@linux.ibm.com> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Archive: List-Post: To: Pierre Morel Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, Cornelia Huck , Martin Schwidefsky , Sebastian Ott , virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, "Michael S. Tsirkin" , Christoph Hellwig , Thomas Huth , Christian Borntraeger , Viktor Mihajlovski , Vasily Gorbik , Janosch Frank , Claudio Imbrenda , Farhan Ali , Eric Farman List-ID: On Thu, 9 May 2019 15:30:08 +0200 Pierre Morel wrote: > On 08/05/2019 16:46, Pierre Morel wrote: > > On 26/04/2019 20:32, Halil Pasic wrote: > >> Before virtio-ccw could get away with not using DMA API for the pieces of > >> memory it does ccw I/O with. With protected virtualization this has to > >> change, since the hypervisor needs to read and sometimes also write these > >> pieces of memory. > >> > >> The hypervisor is supposed to poke the classic notifiers, if these are > >> used, out of band with regards to ccw I/O. So these need to be allocated > >> as DMA memory (which is shared memory for protected virtualization > >> guests). > >> > >> Let us factor out everything from struct virtio_ccw_device that needs to > >> be DMA memory in a satellite that is allocated as such. > >> > ... > >> +                       sizeof(indicators(vcdev))); > > > > should be sizeof(long) ? If something different then sizeof(u64) IMHO. > > > > This is a recurrent error, but it is not an issue because the size of > > the indicators is unsigned long as the size of the pointer. I don't think there is an error, let alone a recurrent one. > > > > Regards, > > Pierre > > > > Here too, with the problem of the indicator size handled: I've laid out my view in a response to your comment on patch #8. > Reviewed-by: Pierre Morel Thanks! Halil