From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.156.1]:13900 "EHLO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727033AbfGLPnA (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Jul 2019 11:43:00 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098409.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id x6CFT8lL031273 for ; Fri, 12 Jul 2019 11:42:59 -0400 Received: from e06smtp07.uk.ibm.com (e06smtp07.uk.ibm.com [195.75.94.103]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2tpucd4uan-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Fri, 12 Jul 2019 11:42:59 -0400 Received: from localhost by e06smtp07.uk.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Fri, 12 Jul 2019 16:42:56 +0100 Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2019 17:42:49 +0200 From: Halil Pasic Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] fs/core/vmcore: Move sev_active() reference to x86 arch code In-Reply-To: <20190712151129.GA30636@lst.de> References: <20190712053631.9814-1-bauerman@linux.ibm.com> <20190712053631.9814-4-bauerman@linux.ibm.com> <20190712150912.3097215e.pasic@linux.ibm.com> <20190712140812.GA29628@lst.de> <20190712165153.78d49095.pasic@linux.ibm.com> <20190712151129.GA30636@lst.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Message-Id: <20190712174249.33b74535.pasic@linux.ibm.com> Sender: linux-s390-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: Thiago Jung Bauermann , x86@kernel.org, iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , Borislav Petkov , "H. Peter Anvin" , Marek Szyprowski , Robin Murphy , Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk , Alexey Dobriyan , Mike Anderson , Ram Pai On Fri, 12 Jul 2019 17:11:29 +0200 Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Fri, Jul 12, 2019 at 04:51:53PM +0200, Halil Pasic wrote: > > Thank you very much! I will have another look, but it seems to me, > > without further measures taken, this would break protected virtualization > > support on s390. The effect of the che for s390 is that > > force_dma_unencrypted() will always return false instead calling into > > the platform code like it did before the patch, right? > > > > Should I send a Fixes: e67a5ed1f86f "dma-direct: Force unencrypted DMA > > under SME for certain DMA masks" (Tom Lendacky, 2019-07-10) patch that > > rectifies things for s390 or how do we want handle this? > > Yes, please do. I hadn't noticed the s390 support had landed in > mainline already. > Will do! I guess I should do the patch against the for-next branch of the dma-mapping tree. But that branch does not have the s390 support patches (yet?). To fix it I need both e67a5ed1f86f and 64e1f0c531d1 "s390/mm: force swiotlb for protected virtualization" (Halil Pasic, 2018-09-13). Or should I wait for e67a5ed1f86f landing in mainline? Regards, Halil