public inbox for linux-s390@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
To: Janis Schoetterl-Glausch <scgl@linux.ibm.com>,
	Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>,
	Janosch Frank <frankja@linux.ibm.com>,
	Heiko Carstens <hca@linux.ibm.com>,
	Vasily Gorbik <gor@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>,
	Claudio Imbrenda <imbrenda@linux.ibm.com>,
	"open list:KERNEL VIRTUAL MACHINE for s390 (KVM/s390)" 
	<kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
	"open list:S390" <linux-s390@vger.kernel.org>,
	open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: s390: Enable specification exception interpretation
Date: Tue, 6 Jul 2021 13:55:17 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <967b92c6-e7ab-2a58-57e6-2945b7ceb94e@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210706114714.3936825-1-scgl@linux.ibm.com>

On 06.07.21 13:47, Janis Schoetterl-Glausch wrote:
> When this feature is enabled the hardware is free to interpret
> specification exceptions generated by the guest, instead of causing
> program interruption interceptions.
> 
> This benefits (test) programs that generate a lot of specification
> exceptions (roughly 4x increase in exceptions/sec).
> 
> Interceptions will occur as before if ICTL_PINT is set,
> i.e. if guest debug is enabled.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Janis Schoetterl-Glausch <scgl@linux.ibm.com>
> ---
> I'll additionally send kvm-unit-tests for testing this feature.
> 
>   arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h | 1 +
>   arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c         | 2 ++
>   arch/s390/kvm/vsie.c             | 2 ++
>   3 files changed, 5 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h b/arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> index 9b4473f76e56..3a5b5084cdbe 100644
> --- a/arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> +++ b/arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> @@ -244,6 +244,7 @@ struct kvm_s390_sie_block {
>   	__u8	fpf;			/* 0x0060 */
>   #define ECB_GS		0x40
>   #define ECB_TE		0x10
> +#define ECB_SPECI	0x08
>   #define ECB_SRSI	0x04
>   #define ECB_HOSTPROTINT	0x02
>   	__u8	ecb;			/* 0x0061 */
> diff --git a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
> index b655a7d82bf0..aadd589a3755 100644
> --- a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
> +++ b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
> @@ -3200,6 +3200,8 @@ static int kvm_s390_vcpu_setup(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>   		vcpu->arch.sie_block->ecb |= ECB_SRSI;
>   	if (test_kvm_facility(vcpu->kvm, 73))
>   		vcpu->arch.sie_block->ecb |= ECB_TE;
> +	if (!kvm_is_ucontrol(vcpu->kvm))
> +		vcpu->arch.sie_block->ecb |= ECB_SPECI;
>   
>   	if (test_kvm_facility(vcpu->kvm, 8) && vcpu->kvm->arch.use_pfmfi)
>   		vcpu->arch.sie_block->ecb2 |= ECB2_PFMFI;
> diff --git a/arch/s390/kvm/vsie.c b/arch/s390/kvm/vsie.c
> index 4002a24bc43a..acda4b6fc851 100644
> --- a/arch/s390/kvm/vsie.c
> +++ b/arch/s390/kvm/vsie.c
> @@ -510,6 +510,8 @@ static int shadow_scb(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct vsie_page *vsie_page)
>   			prefix_unmapped(vsie_page);
>   		scb_s->ecb |= ECB_TE;
>   	}
> +	/* specification exception interpretation */
> +	scb_s->ecb |= scb_o->ecb & ECB_SPECI;
>   	/* branch prediction */
>   	if (test_kvm_facility(vcpu->kvm, 82))
>   		scb_s->fpf |= scb_o->fpf & FPF_BPBC;
> 

I assume this is a new CPU feature, right? If so

a) How can we check whether we can actually safely enable it. (which 
facility do we have to check)
b) Do we have to handle vSIE? Do we have to indicate a CPU feature that 
unlocks this feature?

-- 
Thanks,

David / dhildenb


  parent reply	other threads:[~2021-07-06 12:03 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-07-06 11:47 [PATCH] KVM: s390: Enable specification exception interpretation Janis Schoetterl-Glausch
2021-07-06 11:52 ` Cornelia Huck
2021-07-06 11:56   ` Christian Borntraeger
2021-07-06 11:59     ` David Hildenbrand
2021-07-06 12:02       ` Christian Borntraeger
2021-07-06 15:16         ` David Hildenbrand
2021-07-06 15:27           ` Janis Schoetterl-Glausch
2021-07-07  7:26             ` David Hildenbrand
2021-07-06 11:55 ` David Hildenbrand [this message]
2021-07-07  8:30 ` Christian Borntraeger
2021-07-07  8:54   ` Cornelia Huck
2021-07-07  9:55     ` Janis Schoetterl-Glausch
2021-07-07 11:42       ` Cornelia Huck
2021-07-07  8:56   ` Janis Schoetterl-Glausch
2021-07-07  8:59     ` Christian Borntraeger

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=967b92c6-e7ab-2a58-57e6-2945b7ceb94e@redhat.com \
    --to=david@redhat.com \
    --cc=borntraeger@de.ibm.com \
    --cc=cohuck@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=scgl@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