From: Pierre Morel <pmorel@linux.ibm.com>
To: Janis Schoetterl-Glausch <scgl@linux.ibm.com>, kvm@vger.kernel.org
Cc: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
borntraeger@de.ibm.com, frankja@linux.ibm.com, cohuck@redhat.com,
david@redhat.com, thuth@redhat.com, imbrenda@linux.ibm.com,
hca@linux.ibm.com, gor@linux.ibm.com, wintera@linux.ibm.com,
seiden@linux.ibm.com, nrb@linux.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v12 2/3] KVM: s390: guest support for topology function
Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2022 11:21:43 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5c3d9637-7739-1323-8630-433ff8cb4dc4@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <6124248a-24be-b43a-f827-b6bebf9e7f3d@linux.ibm.com>
On 7/12/22 10:50, Janis Schoetterl-Glausch wrote:
> On 7/12/22 09:45, Pierre Morel wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 7/11/22 14:30, Janis Schoetterl-Glausch wrote:
>>> On 7/11/22 10:41, Pierre Morel wrote:
>>>> We report a topology change to the guest for any CPU hotplug.
>>>>
>>>> The reporting to the guest is done using the Multiprocessor
>>>> Topology-Change-Report (MTCR) bit of the utility entry in the guest's
>>>> SCA which will be cleared during the interpretation of PTF.
>>>>
>>>> On every vCPU creation we set the MCTR bit to let the guest know the
>>>> next time it uses the PTF with command 2 instruction that the
>>>> topology changed and that it should use the STSI(15.1.x) instruction
>>>> to get the topology details.
>>>>
>>>> STSI(15.1.x) gives information on the CPU configuration topology.
>>>> Let's accept the interception of STSI with the function code 15 and
>>>> let the userland part of the hypervisor handle it when userland
>>>> supports the CPU Topology facility.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Pierre Morel <pmorel@linux.ibm.com>
>>>> Reviewed-by: Nico Boehr <nrb@linux.ibm.com>
>>>
>>> Reviewed-by: Janis Schoetterl-Glausch <scgl@linux.ibm.com>
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>>
>>> See nit below.
>>>> ---
>>>> arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h | 18 +++++++++++++++---
>>>> arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c | 31 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>> arch/s390/kvm/priv.c | 22 ++++++++++++++++++----
>>>> arch/s390/kvm/vsie.c | 8 ++++++++
>>>> 4 files changed, 72 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>
>>> [...]
>>>
>>>> diff --git a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
>>>> index 8fcb56141689..70436bfff53a 100644
>>>> --- a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
>>>> +++ b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
>>>> @@ -1691,6 +1691,32 @@ static int kvm_s390_get_cpu_model(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_device_attr *attr)
>>>> return ret;
>>>> }
>>>> +/**
>>>> + * kvm_s390_update_topology_change_report - update CPU topology change report
>>>> + * @kvm: guest KVM description
>>>> + * @val: set or clear the MTCR bit
>>>> + *
>>>> + * Updates the Multiprocessor Topology-Change-Report bit to signal
>>>> + * the guest with a topology change.
>>>> + * This is only relevant if the topology facility is present.
>>>> + *
>>>> + * The SCA version, bsca or esca, doesn't matter as offset is the same.
>>>> + */
>>>> +static void kvm_s390_update_topology_change_report(struct kvm *kvm, bool val)
>>>> +{
>>>> + union sca_utility new, old;
>>>> + struct bsca_block *sca;
>>>> +
>>>> + read_lock(&kvm->arch.sca_lock);
>>>> + do {
>>>> + sca = kvm->arch.sca;
>>>
>>> I find this assignment being in the loop unintuitive, but it should not make a difference.
>>
>> The price would be an ugly cast.
>
> I don't get what you mean. Nothing about the types changes if you move it before the loop.
Yes right, did wrong understand.
It is better before.
>>
>>
>>>
>>>> + old = READ_ONCE(sca->utility);
>>>> + new = old;
>>>> + new.mtcr = val;
>>>> + } while (cmpxchg(&sca->utility.val, old.val, new.val) != old.val);
>>>> + read_unlock(&kvm->arch.sca_lock);
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>> [...]
>>>
>>
>>
>
--
Pierre Morel
IBM Lab Boeblingen
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-07-12 9:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-07-11 8:41 [PATCH v12 0/3] s390x: KVM: CPU Topology Pierre Morel
2022-07-11 8:41 ` [PATCH v12 1/3] KVM: s390: Cleanup ipte lock access and SIIF facility checks Pierre Morel
2022-07-11 8:41 ` [PATCH v12 2/3] KVM: s390: guest support for topology function Pierre Morel
2022-07-11 12:30 ` Janis Schoetterl-Glausch
2022-07-12 7:45 ` Pierre Morel
2022-07-12 8:50 ` Janis Schoetterl-Glausch
2022-07-12 9:21 ` Pierre Morel [this message]
2022-07-13 8:34 ` Janosch Frank
2022-07-13 8:42 ` Pierre Morel
2022-07-11 8:41 ` [PATCH v12 3/3] KVM: s390: resetting the Topology-Change-Report Pierre Morel
2022-07-11 13:22 ` Janis Schoetterl-Glausch
2022-07-12 7:24 ` Pierre Morel
2022-07-12 8:47 ` Janis Schoetterl-Glausch
2022-07-12 11:17 ` Pierre Morel
2022-07-13 9:01 ` Janosch Frank
2022-07-14 8:37 ` Pierre Morel
2022-07-13 9:02 ` [PATCH v12 0/3] s390x: KVM: CPU Topology Janosch Frank
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=5c3d9637-7739-1323-8630-433ff8cb4dc4@linux.ibm.com \
--to=pmorel@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=borntraeger@de.ibm.com \
--cc=cohuck@redhat.com \
--cc=david@redhat.com \
--cc=frankja@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=gor@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=hca@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=imbrenda@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nrb@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=scgl@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=seiden@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=thuth@redhat.com \
--cc=wintera@linux.ibm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox