Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] s390/kvm: VSIE: fix MVPG handling for prefixing
 and MSO
To:     David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
        Claudio Imbrenda <imbrenda@linux.ibm.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc:     frankja@linux.ibm.com, cohuck@redhat.com, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org
References: <20210322140559.500716-1-imbrenda@linux.ibm.com>
 <20210322140559.500716-3-imbrenda@linux.ibm.com>
 <433933f5-1b6e-ea58-618d-3c844edc73a6@de.ibm.com>
 <830ca8c6-4d21-b1ed-ccaf-e0c12237849e@redhat.com>
From:   Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>
Message-ID: <9293b208-0f1d-fb58-290c-66a8ae30d60c@de.ibm.com>
Date:   Tue, 23 Mar 2021 16:16:18 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/78.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <830ca8c6-4d21-b1ed-ccaf-e0c12237849e@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk


On 23.03.21 16:11, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 23.03.21 16:07, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 22.03.21 15:05, Claudio Imbrenda wrote:
>>> Prefixing needs to be applied to the guest real address to translate it
>>> into a guest absolute address.
>>>
>>> The value of MSO needs to be added to a guest-absolute address in order to
>>> obtain the host-virtual.
>>>
>>> Fixes: 223ea46de9e79 ("s390/kvm: VSIE: correctly handle MVPG when in VSIE")
>>> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
>>> Signed-off-by: Claudio Imbrenda <imbrenda@linux.ibm.com>
>>> Reported-by: Janosch Frank <frankja@linux.ibm.com>
>>> ---
>>>    arch/s390/kvm/vsie.c | 6 +++++-
>>>    1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/s390/kvm/vsie.c b/arch/s390/kvm/vsie.c
>>> index 48aab6290a77..ac86f11e46dc 100644
>>> --- a/arch/s390/kvm/vsie.c
>>> +++ b/arch/s390/kvm/vsie.c
>>> @@ -1002,7 +1002,7 @@ static u64 vsie_get_register(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct vsie_page *vsie_page,
>>>    static int vsie_handle_mvpg(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct vsie_page *vsie_page)
>>>    {
>>>        struct kvm_s390_sie_block *scb_s = &vsie_page->scb_s;
>>> -    unsigned long pei_dest, pei_src, src, dest, mask;
>>> +    unsigned long pei_dest, pei_src, dest, src, mask, mso, prefix;
>>>        u64 *pei_block = &vsie_page->scb_o->mcic;
>>>        int edat, rc_dest, rc_src;
>>>        union ctlreg0 cr0;
>>> @@ -1010,9 +1010,13 @@ static int vsie_handle_mvpg(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct vsie_page *vsie_page)
>>>        cr0.val = vcpu->arch.sie_block->gcr[0];
>>>        edat = cr0.edat && test_kvm_facility(vcpu->kvm, 8);
>>>        mask = _kvm_s390_logical_to_effective(&scb_s->gpsw, PAGE_MASK);
>>> +    mso = scb_s->mso & ~(1UL << 20);
>>             shouldnt that be ~((1UL << 20 ) -1)
>>
> 
> Looking at shadow_scb(), we can simply take scb_s->mso unmodified.

Right, I think I can fix this up (and get rid of the local mso variable)
when queueing. Or shall Claudio send a new version of the patch?