Received: by 2002:ac0:a5a6:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id m35-v6csp1820710imm; Thu, 23 Aug 2018 09:15:56 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA+uWPwlwvKNyH1RWrlu7X35eb7M84Zt43SEkGOrsIkZH+uiI3WW+5c4BD4IhvOgMj9RaHWzTVyl X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:d213:: with SMTP id t19-v6mr25230116ply.63.1535040956700; Thu, 23 Aug 2018 09:15:56 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1535040956; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=E1uuOxZGBttVEVgkf/+sP3Or2jgeCMW68FRosxoSHr9O+0ZvBVw1eFLCMry/K6mf7A PSlkmeNlr9l5P25MQu7p47973/m/heatmODdwFB46YFCXwoj8FPKua0a6whnOWwHNUuA /vHuGCv3hTmjhKD0EwYSy5R3HEmFU4tka9GSl4iux6Hg7bcQMOfZOQwldYIpSlWsZw9p AYu8n5A9PFTXksIdFOpfaB5Q0k8Si0vd1OVEGN0C46TCQXI9k7Grg18pVYYnm7O9baYF kE7D3aAFNnJ0pOqXrdnQXRM02ehAhKKUIO89E82aXDMMJlR0iYNRs8bUC6pl9o7q64un gU7A== 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-transfer-encoding :content-language:in-reply-to:mime-version:user-agent:date:from :references:cc:to:subject:reply-to:arc-authentication-results; bh=pdZDkTh3slMMq0kTrS+AAuChvDzU5wiKNHErBO1ZE00=; b=iFPH+M7BY1aqfHWD6uXKRs8orNcq3aGnfhh/0l3ZkJWR7/ClCboTt7c4eqUvsxTBWn vo1IstemoXy+U+Ez0Pj0iHAvaJEnOSmTaF8ljoVbSwerV0DsJm12GSF037rzweW3D0bj um+7B5v1nvk0rybNGj+qOBD1XGruEHMS1WlRmIVLFq8Y3bS80rjp/716yvMPbKxbU0BI aXKAIKjVv9P7mkUJnuXtIIiaC1QjWinC16N+HJ/c1w65VsEJVlEwxFS9VWuw+Qk/vtQt YZkynQN3SDlUR0NjCj2aa/V1WZXOPrWPurCJXxe9O10YCkqVvOCyqVpLcA5AMQ1skEKi 0bAg== 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 22-v6si4538842pgr.635.2018.08.23.09.15.41; Thu, 23 Aug 2018 09:15:56 -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 S1731945AbeHWPLm (ORCPT + 99 others); Thu, 23 Aug 2018 11:11:42 -0400 Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.156.1]:40934 "EHLO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1731921AbeHWPLm (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Aug 2018 11:11:42 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098393.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.22/8.16.0.22) with SMTP id w7NBYgNb089794 for ; Thu, 23 Aug 2018 07:42:21 -0400 Received: from e06smtp07.uk.ibm.com (e06smtp07.uk.ibm.com [195.75.94.103]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2m1urbhdgr-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Thu, 23 Aug 2018 07:42:20 -0400 Received: from localhost by e06smtp07.uk.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Thu, 23 Aug 2018 12:42:18 +0100 Received: from b06cxnps4075.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (9.149.109.197) by e06smtp07.uk.ibm.com (192.168.101.137) with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted; (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256/256) Thu, 23 Aug 2018 12:42:15 +0100 Received: from d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.105.58]) by b06cxnps4075.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id w7NBgDMm42991800 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Thu, 23 Aug 2018 11:42:13 GMT Received: from d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 133C74C046; Thu, 23 Aug 2018 14:42:15 +0100 (BST) Received: from d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id A52664C04E; Thu, 23 Aug 2018 14:42:14 +0100 (BST) Received: from [9.152.224.92] (unknown [9.152.224.92]) by d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Thu, 23 Aug 2018 14:42:14 +0100 (BST) Reply-To: pmorel@linux.ibm.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/3] KVM: s390: vsie: Do the CRYCB validation first To: David Hildenbrand , Christian Borntraeger Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, cohuck@redhat.com, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, frankja@linux.ibm.com, akrowiak@linux.ibm.com, schwidefsky@de.ibm.com, heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com References: <1535019956-23539-1-git-send-email-pmorel@linux.ibm.com> <1535019956-23539-3-git-send-email-pmorel@linux.ibm.com> From: Pierre Morel Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2018 13:42:13 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.9.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 x-cbid: 18082311-0028-0000-0000-000002EEAC35 X-IBM-AV-DETECTION: SAVI=unused REMOTE=unused XFE=unused x-cbparentid: 18082311-0029-0000-0000-000023A7F253 Message-Id: X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:,, definitions=2018-08-23_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=907 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1807170000 definitions=main-1808230125 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 23/08/2018 13:19, David Hildenbrand wrote: > On 23.08.2018 13:17, Christian Borntraeger wrote: >> >> >> On 08/23/2018 12:25 PM, Pierre Morel wrote: >>> When entering the SIE the CRYCB validation better >>> be done independently of the instruction's >>> availability. >> >> Maybe something like >> >> We need to handle the validity checks for the crycb, no matter what the >> settings for the keywrappings are. So lets move the keywrapping checks >> after we have done the validy checks. >> >> ? > > With that > > Reviewed-by: David Hildenbrand > > Thanks, I use the description proposed by Christian. regards, Pierre -- Pierre Morel Linux/KVM/QEMU in Böblingen - Germany