Received: by 2002:ac0:a5a7:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id m36-v6csp142673imm; Fri, 10 Aug 2018 08:55:14 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA+uWPy6Blxbl8xyyIty7ClfR3Y0FT2/QYl7gF6olO+j6LTHn35IMRrQHECyjKkZO09kPgc3Tps1 X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:2ac3:: with SMTP id j61-v6mr6560843plb.172.1533916514418; Fri, 10 Aug 2018 08:55:14 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1533916514; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=tyqDP6YrtnJE00V57DP2ppE987jST1TwKAcPXU4CyjGPjSzQevpZynMQJybsCgu75o nyuBEP7qL6R+spgvGlKunKFh4dLQDSxwQ0V8LsMZwKwtoBaNLWhjBEca9r1Mig0FB7uq irXJx4HiKCwARZB1iZTTdpeIfhWM3gCvsUjBVyZdw/A31vH8EWo9alF2zIOBmCbLGlle LbFoXxOjeRQ9rTGG5ohGh436dzC/QfZ14bY8Z13KqsoOosdfSsDAWtJvlGDXspplQUqq So7TX8SsQAU6zh729LokUCHn5q84vDq2PrpSdQTSl91HQPrnp5dmnHEYh9KoYTDH5buW Zedw== 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=q1f/9WwkhfCYiNfb6TsOwxDzCrBwr/vt6IhI7wvDWWk=; b=krxmBkPtKkgpQVd88PZ2TjJASQS8GBDr/SOQV3/eBi+Wy+Dgv5G01pLHRqO3HqifMe A7PAAE3Ty2RIpXEJk/PaBkfCA8UuCHLSmrTJhmbSwn9LaZIMmcUqjxGqWm70/hSnfKel KIh6kx82q1zN9YUwhSZxaRTKyBFgUwGi2Si1IrSiI6VHeNOjGvxzczzw5wnT/ph5X525 FCsGI7YR7LYBASZkS6ivnubnbMZ1DQs30/oTjtWQtfURTz+wb/wNf7E9HbI5euYxmo/S mj5Pxc6fZ1jlDicQIMkgyoqhzKSjnzFy/kwOWV3xftla3SSkqn7uN1iyjyjv6pIV+zC2 FkmQ== 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 d17-v6si8533648pgp.549.2018.08.10.08.54.59; Fri, 10 Aug 2018 08:55:14 -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 S1728788AbeHJSYc (ORCPT + 99 others); Fri, 10 Aug 2018 14:24:32 -0400 Received: from mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.158.5]:33940 "EHLO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727542AbeHJSYb (ORCPT ); Fri, 10 Aug 2018 14:24:31 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098414.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.22/8.16.0.22) with SMTP id w7AFnD2U012084 for ; Fri, 10 Aug 2018 11:54:05 -0400 Received: from e11.ny.us.ibm.com (e11.ny.us.ibm.com [129.33.205.201]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2kscbh3j2r-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Fri, 10 Aug 2018 11:54:05 -0400 Received: from localhost by e11.ny.us.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Fri, 10 Aug 2018 11:54:05 -0400 Received: from b01cxnp23034.gho.pok.ibm.com (9.57.198.29) by e11.ny.us.ibm.com (146.89.104.198) with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted; (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256/256) Fri, 10 Aug 2018 11:54:00 -0400 Received: from b01ledav006.gho.pok.ibm.com (b01ledav006.gho.pok.ibm.com [9.57.199.111]) by b01cxnp23034.gho.pok.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id w7AFrwTk459258 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Fri, 10 Aug 2018 15:53:58 GMT Received: from b01ledav006.gho.pok.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id E8F91AC05F; Fri, 10 Aug 2018 11:54:25 -0400 (EDT) Received: from b01ledav006.gho.pok.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C12AAC059; Fri, 10 Aug 2018 11:54:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: from oc8043147753.ibm.com (unknown [9.80.230.146]) by b01ledav006.gho.pok.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Fri, 10 Aug 2018 11:54:24 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 04/22] s390/zcrypt: Integrate ap_asm.h into include/asm/ap.h. To: Harald Freudenberger , Cornelia Huck Cc: Tony Krowiak , linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, freude@de.ibm.com, schwidefsky@de.ibm.com, heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com, borntraeger@de.ibm.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, frankja@linux.ibm.com References: <1533739472-7172-1-git-send-email-akrowiak@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1533739472-7172-5-git-send-email-akrowiak@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20180809110645.33b20c1f.cohuck@redhat.com> <323af125-f078-919c-3117-f9022f5529ae@linux.ibm.com> <20180810104929.6d40edef.cohuck@redhat.com> <4251c5c4-6330-d391-f37c-c57dd268efe9@linux.ibm.com> From: Tony Krowiak Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2018 11:53:57 -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: <4251c5c4-6330-d391-f37c-c57dd268efe9@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: 18081015-2213-0000-0000-000002D8C3D3 X-IBM-SpamModules-Scores: X-IBM-SpamModules-Versions: BY=3.00009518; HX=3.00000242; KW=3.00000007; PH=3.00000004; SC=3.00000266; SDB=6.01071695; UDB=6.00551947; IPR=6.00851485; MB=3.00022636; MTD=3.00000008; XFM=3.00000015; UTC=2018-08-10 15:54:03 X-IBM-AV-DETECTION: SAVI=unused REMOTE=unused XFE=unused x-cbparentid: 18081015-2214-0000-0000-00005B2764A8 Message-Id: <31498420-ad49-7fb6-7d13-55513ca0e3d3@linux.ibm.com> X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:,, definitions=2018-08-10_09:,, 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=8.0.1-1807170000 definitions=main-1808100171 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 08/10/2018 05:37 AM, Harald Freudenberger wrote: > On 10.08.2018 10:49, Cornelia Huck wrote: >> On Thu, 9 Aug 2018 12:06:56 -0400 >> Tony Krowiak wrote: >> >>> On 08/09/2018 05:17 AM, Harald Freudenberger wrote: >>>> On 09.08.2018 11:06, Cornelia Huck wrote: >>>>> On Wed, 8 Aug 2018 10:44:14 -0400 >>>>> Tony Krowiak wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> From: Harald Freudenberger >>>>>> >>>>>> Move all the inline functions from the ap bus header >>>>>> file ap_asm.h into the in-kernel api header file >>>>>> arch/s390/include/asm/ap.h so that KVM can make use >>>>>> of all the low level AP functions. >>>>>> >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Harald Freudenberger >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Christian Borntraeger >>>>> You should add your own s-o-b if you are sending on patches written by >>>>> others (even if it does not matter in the end, when they are merged >>>>> through a different path anyway.) >>>>> >>>>>> --- >>>>>> arch/s390/include/asm/ap.h | 284 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---- >>>>>> drivers/s390/crypto/ap_asm.h | 261 ------------------------------------ >>>>>> drivers/s390/crypto/ap_bus.c | 21 +--- >>>>>> drivers/s390/crypto/ap_bus.h | 1 + >>>>>> drivers/s390/crypto/ap_card.c | 1 - >>>>>> drivers/s390/crypto/ap_queue.c | 1 - >>>>>> 6 files changed, 259 insertions(+), 310 deletions(-) >>>>>> delete mode 100644 drivers/s390/crypto/ap_asm.h >>>>>> >>>>>> diff --git a/arch/s390/include/asm/ap.h b/arch/s390/include/asm/ap.h >>>>>> index c1bedb4..046e044 100644 >>>>>> --- a/arch/s390/include/asm/ap.h >>>>>> +++ b/arch/s390/include/asm/ap.h >>>>>> @@ -47,6 +47,50 @@ struct ap_queue_status { >>>>>> }; >>>>>> >>>>>> /** >>>>>> + * ap_intructions_available() - Test if AP instructions are available. >>>>>> + * >>>>>> + * Returns 0 if the AP instructions are installed. >>>>> Stumbled over this when I was looking at the usage in patch 7: if I see >>>>> a function called '_available' return 0, I'd assume that whatever the >>>>> function tests for is *not* available. >>>>> >>>>> Rather call this function ap_instructions_check_availability() (and >>>>> keep the return code convention), or switch this to return 0 if not >>>>> available and !0 if available? >>>> Good catch, Cony you are right. I'll fix this to return 1 if AP instructions >>>> are available and 0 if not. However, this patch will come via Martin's pipe >>>> to the Linus Torwald kernel sources. >>> Is your intent to simply indicate whether the AP instructions are >>> available or >>> not; or is the intention to indicate whether the AP instructions are >>> available >>> and if not, they why? In the former, then I agree that a boolean should be >>> returned; however, if the case is the latter, then what you have is fine but >>> maybe the function name should be changed as Connie suggests. >> So, can this actually fail for any reason other than "instructions not >> installed"? Even if it did, the end result is that the instructions are >> not usable -- I don't think the "why" would be interesting at that >> point. > I can not think of any other reason why the PQAP(TAPQ) would fail > other than the AP instructions are not available at all. However, > the old implementation returned -ENODEV on failure and 0 on > success. The new implementation now returns 1 for success > and 0 for failure. This is just one of a couple of functions related > to ap xxx available. I'll rework them all to return a boolean value > soon. How would you recommend I proceed given I have functions that call this interface that check the rc and I've had to include your patches in this series because of that dependence? >>>>>> + */ >>>>>> +static inline int ap_instructions_available(void) >>>>>> +{ >>>>>> + register unsigned long reg0 asm ("0") = AP_MKQID(0, 0); >>>>>> + register unsigned long reg1 asm ("1") = -ENODEV; >>>>>> + register unsigned long reg2 asm ("2"); >>>>>> + >>>>>> + asm volatile( >>>>>> + " .long 0xb2af0000\n" /* PQAP(TAPQ) */ >>>>>> + "0: la %0,0\n" >>>>>> + "1:\n" >>>>>> + EX_TABLE(0b, 1b) >>>>>> + : "+d" (reg1), "=d" (reg2) >>>>>> + : "d" (reg0) >>>>>> + : "cc"); >>>>>> + return reg1; >>>>>> +}