From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tony Krowiak Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 02/15] KVM: s390: reset crypto attributes for all vcpus Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2018 10:55:30 -0400 Message-ID: <4dd8242a-4f25-065f-5eea-e53c73130763@linux.vnet.ibm.com> References: <1523827345-11600-1-git-send-email-akrowiak@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1523827345-11600-3-git-send-email-akrowiak@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <41496d07-54b3-5cc6-8803-a935f6d821ee@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <41496d07-54b3-5cc6-8803-a935f6d821ee@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Content-Language: en-US Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Archive: List-Post: To: Halil Pasic , linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, akrowiak@linux.vnet.ibm.com Cc: freude@de.ibm.com, schwidefsky@de.ibm.com, heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com, borntraeger@de.ibm.com, cohuck@redhat.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, jjherne@linux.vnet.ibm.com, thuth@redhat.com, berrange@redhat.com, fiuczy@linux.vnet.ibm.com, buendgen@de.ibm.com List-ID: On 04/17/2018 10:29 AM, Halil Pasic wrote: > > > On 04/15/2018 11:22 PM, Tony Krowiak wrote: >> Introduces a new function to reset the crypto attributes for all >> vcpus whether they are running or not. Each vcpu in KVM will >> be removed from SIE prior to resetting the crypto attributes in its >> SIE state description. After all vcpus have had their crypto attributes >> reset the vcpus will be restored to SIE. >> >> This function will be used in a later patch to set the ECA.28 >> bit in the SIE state description to enable interpretive execution of >> AP instructions. It will also be incorporated into the >> kvm_s390_vm_set_crypto(kvm) function to fix an issue whereby the crypto >> key wrapping attributes could potentially get out of synch for running >> vcpus. >> > > Wasn't this 'issue' reported by me by any chance? Yes it was .... was I supposed to include that fact in the commit message? > > I agree with Connnie, we don't need the forward reference to > ECA.28. I'm not sure that's exactly what she said, but I'd be more than happy to remove it. > > > Regards, > Halil > >> Signed-off-by: Tony Krowiak >