From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 133A2C433FE for ; Wed, 9 Dec 2020 09:02:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3768E23B5D for ; Wed, 9 Dec 2020 09:02:12 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 3768E23B5D Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.ibm.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Received: from localhost ([::1]:56844 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kmvMQ-0004od-T9 for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Wed, 09 Dec 2020 04:02:10 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:49194) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kmvFV-0002oG-Ck; Wed, 09 Dec 2020 03:55:01 -0500 Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.156.1]:13466) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kmvFT-0005h9-GL; Wed, 09 Dec 2020 03:55:01 -0500 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098394.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 0B98VmqM169667; Wed, 9 Dec 2020 03:54:54 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ibm.com; h=to : cc : references : from : subject : message-id : date : mime-version : in-reply-to : content-type : content-transfer-encoding; s=pp1; bh=nmogp2sZeQdu1o7RWX6+1CpB5ec5Ym1A/5bbhuhSpiM=; b=pyvxT19apg5u6t3D4oWkVvHmQGnUoO25DpJW+wobn4/5LkDqYgJle9dL3FFwsdhX4ItO omYUNUqWVRQmYqBrrldnXHZ8eYrc+Vwq4wRb2iPmpNtdIyypujpZeyiiTfoAiC0Eo6V/ zQinaUqtdQCs+bZcb8Bn1xHp6DapXpt1CRfHUS9UIb7NoYpeIt2Egbtzs+sADspbzll7 ZgLWTqVNdz7gQgFE/RF2n7y/wBgSZE3aBq/tGpMi7lDpu1CnkxaIaT8JL7Mu1GFwXR8T 2pcNqgNR+p6HmYhRr8LMVuAEwsXpPWd32untv40NiWEhFAkz8bWM27J/7L6ROvdmsfsU vw== Received: from pps.reinject (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 35ahbdxsav-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 09 Dec 2020 03:54:54 -0500 Received: from m0098394.ppops.net (m0098394.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by pps.reinject (8.16.0.36/8.16.0.36) with SMTP id 0B98WQL0172974; Wed, 9 Dec 2020 03:54:53 -0500 Received: from ppma05fra.de.ibm.com (6c.4a.5195.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [149.81.74.108]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 35ahbdxsa6-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 09 Dec 2020 03:54:53 -0500 Received: from pps.filterd (ppma05fra.de.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma05fra.de.ibm.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 0B98riig030591; Wed, 9 Dec 2020 08:54:51 GMT Received: from b06cxnps4075.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06relay12.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.109.197]) by ppma05fra.de.ibm.com with ESMTP id 35958q1bkh-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 09 Dec 2020 08:54:51 +0000 Received: from b06wcsmtp001.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (b06wcsmtp001.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.105.160]) by b06cxnps4075.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 0B98smsI65208788 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 9 Dec 2020 08:54:49 GMT Received: from b06wcsmtp001.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id DCC78A4054; Wed, 9 Dec 2020 08:54:48 +0000 (GMT) Received: from b06wcsmtp001.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 97615A405B; Wed, 9 Dec 2020 08:54:48 +0000 (GMT) Received: from localhost.localdomain (unknown [9.145.43.26]) by b06wcsmtp001.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Wed, 9 Dec 2020 08:54:48 +0000 (GMT) To: David Hildenbrand , Christian Borntraeger , qemu-devel@nongnu.org References: <20201204083655.27946-1-frankja@linux.ibm.com> <1c42abcc-b28e-4b6a-d363-ff6daf7b7883@de.ibm.com> <66975842-fcf3-013d-9bba-fed5c2c69a67@de.ibm.com> From: Janosch Frank Subject: Re: [PATCH] s390x: pv: Fence additional unavailable SCLP facilities for PV guests Message-ID: <65c709d2-b6a1-d8ee-4bcc-de57d98d2b0b@linux.ibm.com> Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2020 09:54:48 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.343, 18.0.737 definitions=2020-12-09_07:2020-12-08, 2020-12-09 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 adultscore=0 suspectscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 malwarescore=0 clxscore=1015 priorityscore=1501 mlxscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 impostorscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 phishscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2009150000 definitions=main-2012090056 Received-SPF: pass client-ip=148.163.156.1; envelope-from=frankja@linux.ibm.com; helo=mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com X-Spam_score_int: -26 X-Spam_score: -2.7 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.7 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: qemu-s390x@nongnu.org, cohuck@redhat.com Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" On 12/8/20 5:19 PM, David Hildenbrand wrote: > On 08.12.20 17:11, Christian Borntraeger wrote: >> >> >> On 08.12.20 15:55, David Hildenbrand wrote: >>> On 08.12.20 14:29, Christian Borntraeger wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> On 04.12.20 09:36, Janosch Frank wrote: >>>>> There's no VSIE support for a protected guest, so let's better not >>>>> advertise it and its support facilities. >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Janosch Frank >>>> >>>> Looks sane. Assuming that all features that depend on SIE are named S390_FEAT_SIE_* >>>> this should take care of everything. (i compared to gen-facilities.c) >>> >>> We could add dependency checks to >>> target/s390x/cpu_models.c:check_consistency() >> >> That could be an additional patch, right? > > Yeah sure. > >> >>> >>> What about >>> >>> DEF_FEAT(ESOP, "esop", SCLP_CONF_CHAR, 46, >>> "Enhanced-suppression-on-protection facility") >> >> ESOP does make sense independent from SIE see chapter 3-15 in the POP >> in "Suppression on Protection" >> > > Rings a bell :) > >> >>> DEF_FEAT(HPMA2, "hpma2", SCLP_CONF_CHAR, 90, "Host page management >>> assist 2 Facility") >> >> Right. We should also fence of hpma2. > > I was also wondering about CMM, but as the guest senses it by executing > the instruction, protected guests will never see it I assume. > Yep, it's a operation exception.