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 1/2] s390x: KVM: accept STSI for CPU topology
 information
To:     Pierre Morel <pmorel@linux.ibm.com>, kvm@vger.kernel.org
Cc:     linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        frankja@linux.ibm.com, cohuck@redhat.com, david@redhat.com,
        thuth@redhat.com, imbrenda@linux.ibm.com, hca@linux.ibm.com,
        gor@linux.ibm.com
References: <1626973353-17446-1-git-send-email-pmorel@linux.ibm.com>
 <1626973353-17446-2-git-send-email-pmorel@linux.ibm.com>
From:   Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>
Message-ID: <9af7e42f-2d01-08d6-f27f-9e7b5bec360f@de.ibm.com>
Date:   Fri, 23 Jul 2021 10:34:06 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/78.11.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <1626973353-17446-2-git-send-email-pmorel@linux.ibm.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk


On 22.07.21 19:02, Pierre Morel wrote:
> STSI(15.1.x) gives information on the CPU configuration topology.
> Let's accept the interception of STSI with the function code 15 and
> let the userland part of the hypervisor handle it when userland
> support the CPU Topology facility.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Pierre Morel <pmorel@linux.ibm.com>
> ---
>   arch/s390/kvm/priv.c | 7 ++++++-
>   1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/s390/kvm/priv.c b/arch/s390/kvm/priv.c
> index 9928f785c677..8581b6881212 100644
> --- a/arch/s390/kvm/priv.c
> +++ b/arch/s390/kvm/priv.c
> @@ -856,7 +856,8 @@ static int handle_stsi(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>   	if (vcpu->arch.sie_block->gpsw.mask & PSW_MASK_PSTATE)
>   		return kvm_s390_inject_program_int(vcpu, PGM_PRIVILEGED_OP);
>   
> -	if (fc > 3) {
> +	if ((fc > 3 && fc != 15) ||
> +	    (fc == 15 && !test_kvm_facility(vcpu->kvm, 11))) {

Especially as you use test_kvm_facility here you really want to have the cpu
model in patch 2 (and not CAP).

>   		kvm_s390_set_psw_cc(vcpu, 3);
>   		return 0;
>   	}
> @@ -893,6 +894,10 @@ static int handle_stsi(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>   			goto out_no_data;
>   		handle_stsi_3_2_2(vcpu, (void *) mem);
>   		break;
> +	case 15:
> +		trace_kvm_s390_handle_stsi(vcpu, fc, sel1, sel2, operand2);
> +		insert_stsi_usr_data(vcpu, operand2, ar, fc, sel1, sel2);
> +		return -EREMOTE;
>   	}
>   	if (kvm_s390_pv_cpu_is_protected(vcpu)) {
>   		memcpy((void *)sida_origin(vcpu->arch.sie_block), (void *)mem,
>