From: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com>
To: Janis Schoetterl-Glausch <scgl@linux.ibm.com>,
Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com>,
Janosch Frank <frankja@linux.ibm.com>,
Claudio Imbrenda <imbrenda@linux.ibm.com>,
Heiko Carstens <hca@linux.ibm.com>,
Vasily Gorbik <gor@linux.ibm.com>,
Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org,
linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
Sven Schnelle <svens@linux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/9] Documentation: KVM: s390: Describe KVM_S390_MEMOP_F_CMPXCHG
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2022 08:47:17 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <f96b50e2-24ac-4016-d3f1-ffc375516e7c@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20221117221758.66326-3-scgl@linux.ibm.com>
On 17/11/2022 23.17, Janis Schoetterl-Glausch wrote:
> Describe the semantics of the new KVM_S390_MEMOP_F_CMPXCHG flag for
> absolute vm write memops which allows user space to perform (storage key
> checked) cmpxchg operations on guest memory.
>
> Signed-off-by: Janis Schoetterl-Glausch <scgl@linux.ibm.com>
> ---
...
> Supported flags:
> * ``KVM_S390_MEMOP_F_CHECK_ONLY``
> * ``KVM_S390_MEMOP_F_SKEY_PROTECTION``
> + * ``KVM_S390_MEMOP_F_CMPXCHG``
> +
> +The semantics of the flags common with logical acesses are as for logical
> +accesses.
> +
> +For write accesses, the KVM_S390_MEMOP_F_CMPXCHG might be supported.
I'd maybe merge this with the last sentence:
For write accesses, the KVM_S390_MEMOP_F_CMPXCHG flag is supported if
KVM_CAP_S390_MEM_OP_EXTENSION has bit 1 (i.e. bit with value 2) set.
... and speaking of that, I wonder whether it's maybe a good idea to
introduce some #defines for bit 1 / value 2, to avoid the confusion ?
> +In this case, instead of doing an unconditional write, the access occurs only
> +if the target location contains the "size" byte long value pointed to by
> +"old_p". This is performed as an atomic cmpxchg.
I had to read the first sentence twice to understand it ... maybe it's
easier to understand if you move the "size" part to the second sentence:
In this case, instead of doing an unconditional write, the access occurs
only if the target location contains value pointed to by "old_p". This is
performed as an atomic cmpxchg with the length specified by the "size"
parameter.
?
> "size" must be a power of two
> +up to and including 16.
> +The value at the target location is written to the location "old_p" points to.
IMHO something like this would be better:
The value at the target location is replaced with the value from the
location that "old_p" points to.
> +If the exchange did not take place because the target value doesn't match the
> +old value KVM_S390_MEMOP_R_NO_XCHG is returned.
> +The KVM_S390_MEMOP_F_CMPXCHG flag is supported if KVM_CAP_S390_MEM_OP_EXTENSION
> +has bit 1 (i.e. bit with value 2) set.
Thomas
PS: Please take my suggestions with a grain of salt ... I'm not a native
speaker either.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-11-22 7:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-11-17 22:17 [PATCH v3 0/9] KVM: s390: Extend MEM_OP ioctl by storage key checked cmpxchg Janis Schoetterl-Glausch
2022-11-17 22:17 ` [PATCH v3 1/9] " Janis Schoetterl-Glausch
2022-11-18 10:12 ` Heiko Carstens
2022-11-18 14:37 ` Thomas Huth
2022-11-18 15:15 ` Heiko Carstens
2022-11-21 17:41 ` Janis Schoetterl-Glausch
2022-12-01 16:15 ` Claudio Imbrenda
2022-12-01 17:44 ` Janis Schoetterl-Glausch
2022-12-02 9:00 ` Claudio Imbrenda
2022-11-17 22:17 ` [PATCH v3 2/9] Documentation: KVM: s390: Describe KVM_S390_MEMOP_F_CMPXCHG Janis Schoetterl-Glausch
2022-11-18 1:50 ` Bagas Sanjaya
2022-11-21 17:44 ` Janis Schoetterl-Glausch
2022-11-22 7:47 ` Thomas Huth [this message]
2022-11-22 13:10 ` Janis Schoetterl-Glausch
2022-11-25 8:52 ` Nico Boehr
2022-12-01 16:21 ` Claudio Imbrenda
2022-11-17 22:17 ` [PATCH v3 3/9] KVM: s390: selftest: memop: Pass mop_desc via pointer Janis Schoetterl-Glausch
2022-11-17 22:17 ` [PATCH v3 4/9] KVM: s390: selftest: memop: Replace macros by functions Janis Schoetterl-Glausch
2022-12-01 16:28 ` Claudio Imbrenda
2022-12-01 17:58 ` Janis Schoetterl-Glausch
2022-11-17 22:17 ` [PATCH v3 5/9] KVM: s390: selftest: memop: Move testlist into main Janis Schoetterl-Glausch
2022-11-22 7:52 ` Thomas Huth
2022-11-22 9:34 ` Janis Schoetterl-Glausch
2022-11-17 22:17 ` [PATCH v3 6/9] KVM: s390: selftest: memop: Add cmpxchg tests Janis Schoetterl-Glausch
2022-11-17 22:17 ` [PATCH v3 7/9] KVM: s390: selftest: memop: Add bad address test Janis Schoetterl-Glausch
2022-11-17 22:17 ` [PATCH v3 8/9] KVM: s390: selftest: memop: Fix typo Janis Schoetterl-Glausch
2022-11-17 22:17 ` [PATCH v3 9/9] KVM: s390: selftest: memop: Fix wrong address being used in test Janis Schoetterl-Glausch
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=f96b50e2-24ac-4016-d3f1-ffc375516e7c@redhat.com \
--to=thuth@redhat.com \
--cc=agordeev@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=borntraeger@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--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-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=scgl@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
--cc=svens@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