Received: by 2002:ac0:a5b6:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id m51-v6csp4546750imm; Wed, 30 May 2018 07:36:16 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADUXVKL8ODJPDoNoGFPE+TKLzysK2yDxecQ7kew9xhGRU/zzTSQL2ijykYqyVLpGOSABI5Q2Z1nR X-Received: by 2002:a63:7d43:: with SMTP id m3-v6mr2485679pgn.117.1527690976529; Wed, 30 May 2018 07:36:16 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1527690976; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=NCFsvq4xC17jI7iERq7W0F+cca3eF1fgYey7ldt2Vva3TtKPYNb0nrtDJL9D/hu2UJ qz17gfpwCbLN7CfQV7whqVGtQnkIBPoBt1LnQWsrI8VYzWKtPp2tqO/5GVX0tlkt8T8M W4R4PKRU9n89cSzA/WJwnh3+8gOnBOWW6CYbAmCo1piK5Pn8lyeuWZ3OXk7/iJSBt4Eo PmIfACvB0e11rQQLU/jakARriZBZoPg/TlZCGy5D4rnbEP1DGsCq63FkMMf7lYElkYhJ o8BKDEFE5FvIxlW1k7GjY7enRzCb/taDvu/IkdpbnQKv+sGuA/NSiGXmzwNH1mApT4aj ySVg== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:message-id:content-language :content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:mime-version:user-agent:date :from:references:cc:to:subject:arc-authentication-results; bh=EP9VvpgKmOoDldg6nN5q3r//97GkVlOVvmLPnynNGnc=; b=QWzfMGSC082ohKPA74KqD5GH8YkkuhcPqu+rspTbEJYORysOOh9w3Gi6RrshXX2oFa yK9YcLmZIxdcH7GPSso6NZP7B7qvwpXNTSVIHlCedAv7zF2Mc0tkY1bwO/0gjfo54Eua G6DqYxljSDwmB6YGZDqdaxjleHME/fBd1zYPnYBxXwbva/CCQ/lJa3M7cleexSNi4MbK k+t9Td+BERVgP3gam/p/roVVwo6rWx2+EfHHxumFo7KUF3o0+iY643tTtPPK+vHSAaug KxeN5ykZpcs2cFrayhLj7KHpiE8BaGXuH3pKw/06xhsreg8xPQZT28bHdNAGUx1009Ye uweQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=ibm.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id q7-v6si27417557pgv.658.2018.05.30.07.36.02; Wed, 30 May 2018 07:36:16 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=ibm.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753405AbeE3Od2 (ORCPT + 99 others); Wed, 30 May 2018 10:33:28 -0400 Received: from mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.158.5]:45078 "EHLO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751684AbeE3OdZ (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 May 2018 10:33:25 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098421.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.22/8.16.0.22) with SMTP id w4UETCYO110383 for ; Wed, 30 May 2018 10:33:25 -0400 Received: from e34.co.us.ibm.com (e34.co.us.ibm.com [32.97.110.152]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2j9vk5c50d-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Wed, 30 May 2018 10:33:25 -0400 Received: from localhost by e34.co.us.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Wed, 30 May 2018 08:33:24 -0600 Received: from b03cxnp08028.gho.boulder.ibm.com (9.17.130.20) by e34.co.us.ibm.com (192.168.1.134) with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted; (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256/256) Wed, 30 May 2018 08:33:20 -0600 Received: from b03ledav006.gho.boulder.ibm.com (b03ledav006.gho.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.130.237]) by b03cxnp08028.gho.boulder.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id w4UEXHxH9568598 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Wed, 30 May 2018 07:33:17 -0700 Received: from b03ledav006.gho.boulder.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3426AC6042; Wed, 30 May 2018 08:33:17 -0600 (MDT) Received: from oc8043147753.ibm.com (unknown [9.85.140.230]) by b03ledav006.gho.boulder.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A352C604C; Wed, 30 May 2018 08:33:14 -0600 (MDT) Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 11/13] KVM: s390: implement mediated device open callback To: pmorel@linux.ibm.com, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org 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, pasic@linux.vnet.ibm.com, berrange@redhat.com, fiuczy@linux.vnet.ibm.com, buendgen@de.ibm.com References: <1525705912-12815-1-git-send-email-akrowiak@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1525705912-12815-12-git-send-email-akrowiak@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <98ea7ce2-2539-e2ff-4bb4-297e784d87bd@linux.ibm.com> <7bb480ac-5723-83ff-c797-53c1ab0458c1@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <93cd0f46-a410-51c8-00b9-810c1b3d3ae2@linux.ibm.com> From: Tony Krowiak Date: Wed, 30 May 2018 10:33:13 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <93cd0f46-a410-51c8-00b9-810c1b3d3ae2@linux.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Language: en-US X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 x-cbid: 18053014-0016-0000-0000-000008D5E97D X-IBM-SpamModules-Scores: X-IBM-SpamModules-Versions: BY=3.00009098; HX=3.00000241; KW=3.00000007; PH=3.00000004; SC=3.00000264; SDB=6.01039857; UDB=6.00532246; IPR=6.00818990; MB=3.00021377; MTD=3.00000008; XFM=3.00000015; UTC=2018-05-30 14:33:23 X-IBM-AV-DETECTION: SAVI=unused REMOTE=unused XFE=unused x-cbparentid: 18053014-0017-0000-0000-00003F0055C4 Message-Id: <0f37dc39-7355-19e5-40c9-a02a1ea58c2d@linux.vnet.ibm.com> X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:,, definitions=2018-05-30_07:,, signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1805220000 definitions=main-1805300161 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 05/24/2018 05:08 AM, Pierre Morel wrote: > On 23/05/2018 16:45, Tony Krowiak wrote: >> On 05/16/2018 04:03 AM, Pierre Morel wrote: >>> On 07/05/2018 17:11, Tony Krowiak wrote: >>>> Implements the open callback on the mediated matrix device. >>>> The function registers a group notifier to receive notification >>>> of the VFIO_GROUP_NOTIFY_SET_KVM event. When notified, >>>> the vfio_ap device driver will get access to the guest's >>>> kvm structure. With access to this structure the driver will: >>>> >>>> 1. Ensure that only one mediated device is opened for the guest > > You should explain why. > >>>> >>>> 2. Configure access to the AP devices for the guest. >>>> > ...snip... >>>> +void kvm_ap_refcount_inc(struct kvm *kvm) >>>> +{ >>>> + atomic_inc(&kvm->arch.crypto.aprefs); >>>> +} >>>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(kvm_ap_refcount_inc); >>>> + >>>> +void kvm_ap_refcount_dec(struct kvm *kvm) >>>> +{ >>>> + atomic_dec(&kvm->arch.crypto.aprefs); >>>> +} >>>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(kvm_ap_refcount_dec); >>> >>> Why are these functions inside kvm-ap ? >>> Will anyone use this outer of vfio-ap ? >> >> As I've stated before, I made the choice to contain all interfaces that >> access KVM in kvm-ap because I don't think it is appropriate for the >> device >> driver to have to have "knowledge" of the inner workings of KVM. Why >> does >> it matter whether any entity outside of the vfio_ap device driver calls >> these functions? I could ask a similar question if the interfaces were >> contained in vfio-ap; what if another device driver needs access to >> these >> interfaces? > > This is very driver specific and only used during initialization. > It is not a common property of the cryptographic interface. > > I really think you should handle this inside the driver. We are going to have to agree to disagree on this one. Is it not possible that future drivers - e.g., when full virtualization is implemented - will require access to KVM? > > Pierre > > > ...snip... > >