Received: by 2002:ac0:a5b6:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id m51-v6csp836283imm; Tue, 5 Jun 2018 05:22:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADUXVKKJF4I3KfEHCpjJCtStKfA+D0YcnFgVgrRlmFHEG6At8R59VdUrMAa1qxmt7K8BOmIFDOr+ X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:aa84:: with SMTP id d4-v6mr5622351plr.352.1528201324721; Tue, 05 Jun 2018 05:22:04 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1528201324; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=lQx5QUPeaNUiXVwp6hguTi+HjPLzOg09tGBH71bMD/sIdsufkD5hDdCJAepWKF2XFj FYMlzSTVGGIKdwJJQIipZnnyxqsY2uN6gZ6newUBqhXt6PPzL5j1kyiUkK6yfjnkkplI v17TVGt4O2wXe7WVgwE3bqxlSQcDaNx1RGH8MOjC8nbOtOV1/uf6o8xFYAMVf3j3ZrEf c87LjI+rW6OlAKCunzn/fvcwk57soEnpJVrFPQZ4q7lCipM/I5jWE4R89f2PIg9BoQQl W+8B3ZLLk6jndmu1X2/vatY/ebrjDVSCv7rr3yPdbQL3T5J9UQKVOJ7jrC09qMl4MYTp wKZg== 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:reply-to:arc-authentication-results; bh=CfOxhbVw86XpmlfyUthbOh5zmmRTphFDaE36zkWZrwU=; b=actmQftlGb1AXsgQFTmsqAkCJ9rq5lBjWJ4kUgxdhbXejIiAVpnMsm9v2yzwLE4yQW bwCWUXAZt3Mj3zH6Ic3t6ntdiNGqJVEnFVA8uqjU3da5AJMJ+QLz+t4be1JI8UBJOmaD Xvi2F9l+7KAMd35WzrJOgj+/aQOM1qMgtI+qFkK8GXNxV1MjHtGHZfk05nNdM5B3hF8R L8olOnQy8cDlpD0naO3Rzd/zuDg1PRd8t35wGwEM81J/4tbuU0WSqCFhU9S3kKniakTG Dpzp+tjsP/45+qs5GGrhTSkjM/pvsoCRKf3F7VE41ZZEiU9zpOX7a7N9K8FaK/fbjEp9 rHqw== 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 u30-v6si19083801pgo.678.2018.06.05.05.21.50; Tue, 05 Jun 2018 05:22:04 -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 S1751989AbeFEMUF (ORCPT + 99 others); Tue, 5 Jun 2018 08:20:05 -0400 Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.156.1]:40078 "EHLO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751784AbeFEMUD (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Jun 2018 08:20:03 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098404.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.22/8.16.0.22) with SMTP id w55CJtXg100709 for ; Tue, 5 Jun 2018 08:20:02 -0400 Received: from e06smtp01.uk.ibm.com (e06smtp01.uk.ibm.com [195.75.94.97]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2jdraf5u4h-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Tue, 05 Jun 2018 08:20:02 -0400 Received: from localhost by e06smtp01.uk.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Tue, 5 Jun 2018 13:20:00 +0100 Received: from b06cxnps4074.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (9.149.109.196) by e06smtp01.uk.ibm.com (192.168.101.131) with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted; (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256/256) Tue, 5 Jun 2018 13:19:56 +0100 Received: from d06av21.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06av21.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.105.232]) by b06cxnps4074.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id w55CJsEE27721936 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Tue, 5 Jun 2018 12:19:54 GMT Received: from d06av21.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F87252041; Tue, 5 Jun 2018 12:09:34 +0100 (BST) Received: from [9.152.224.33] (unknown [9.152.224.33]) by d06av21.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5BE7C5203F; Tue, 5 Jun 2018 12:09:33 +0100 (BST) Reply-To: pmorel@linux.ibm.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 11/13] KVM: s390: implement mediated device open callback To: Tony Krowiak , 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> <0f37dc39-7355-19e5-40c9-a02a1ea58c2d@linux.vnet.ibm.com> From: Pierre Morel Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2018 14:19:53 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <0f37dc39-7355-19e5-40c9-a02a1ea58c2d@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Language: en-US X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 x-cbid: 18060512-4275-0000-0000-0000028A5A28 X-IBM-AV-DETECTION: SAVI=unused REMOTE=unused XFE=unused x-cbparentid: 18060512-4276-0000-0000-000037915E43 Message-Id: <736a1346-f81a-7f71-7d13-38729ff78e4f@linux.ibm.com> X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:,, definitions=2018-06-05_05:,, 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-1806050143 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 30/05/2018 16:33, Tony Krowiak wrote: > 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? I do not think that an access to KVM is required for full virtualization. -- Pierre Morel Linux/KVM/QEMU in Böblingen - Germany