[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH v6 10/18] s390x: protvirt: SCLP interpretation
From: |
David Hildenbrand |
Subject: |
Re: [PATCH v6 10/18] s390x: protvirt: SCLP interpretation |
Date: |
Wed, 4 Mar 2020 18:48:52 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.5.0 |
On 04.03.20 12:42, Janosch Frank wrote:
> SCLP for a protected guest is done over the SIDAD, so we need to use
> the s390_cpu_virt_mem_* functions to access the SIDAD instead of guest
nope :)
s390_cpu_pv_mem_*
> memory when reading/writing SCBs.
>
> To not confuse the sclp emulation, we set 0x4000 as the SCCB address,
> since the function that injects the sclp external interrupt would
> reject a zero sccb address.
Please add that as a comment to SCLP_PV_DUMMY_ADDR.
>
> Signed-off-by: Janosch Frank <address@hidden>
> ---
> hw/s390x/sclp.c | 17 +++++++++++++++++
> include/hw/s390x/sclp.h | 2 ++
> target/s390x/kvm.c | 5 +++++
> 3 files changed, 24 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/hw/s390x/sclp.c b/hw/s390x/sclp.c
> index af0bfbc2ec..5136f5fcbe 100644
> --- a/hw/s390x/sclp.c
> +++ b/hw/s390x/sclp.c
> @@ -193,6 +193,23 @@ static void sclp_execute(SCLPDevice *sclp, SCCB *sccb,
> uint32_t code)
> }
> }
>
> +#define SCLP_PV_DUMMY_ADDR 0x4000
Should we move that to sclp_c->service_interrupt instead and document it
properly?
Or what about providing a
sclp_c->service_interrupt_pv(sclp) that handles this internally?
> +int sclp_service_call_protected(CPUS390XState *env, uint64_t sccb,
> + uint32_t code)
> +{
> + SCLPDevice *sclp = get_sclp_device();
> + SCLPDeviceClass *sclp_c = SCLP_GET_CLASS(sclp);
> + SCCB work_sccb;
> + hwaddr sccb_len = sizeof(SCCB);
> +
> + s390_cpu_pv_mem_read(env_archcpu(env), 0, &work_sccb, sccb_len);
I assume it's valid to always read the full SCCB length?
> + sclp_c->execute(sclp, &work_sccb, code);
> + s390_cpu_pv_mem_write(env_archcpu(env), 0, &work_sccb,
> + be16_to_cpu(work_sccb.h.length));
> + sclp_c->service_interrupt(sclp, SCLP_PV_DUMMY_ADDR);
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> int sclp_service_call(CPUS390XState *env, uint64_t sccb, uint32_t code)
> {
> SCLPDevice *sclp = get_sclp_device();
> diff --git a/include/hw/s390x/sclp.h b/include/hw/s390x/sclp.h
> index c54413b78c..c0a3faa37d 100644
> --- a/include/hw/s390x/sclp.h
> +++ b/include/hw/s390x/sclp.h
> @@ -217,5 +217,7 @@ void s390_sclp_init(void);
> void sclp_service_interrupt(uint32_t sccb);
> void raise_irq_cpu_hotplug(void);
> int sclp_service_call(CPUS390XState *env, uint64_t sccb, uint32_t code);
> +int sclp_service_call_protected(CPUS390XState *env, uint64_t sccb,
> + uint32_t code);
>
> #endif
> diff --git a/target/s390x/kvm.c b/target/s390x/kvm.c
> index 43fc0c088b..a4cbdc5fc6 100644
> --- a/target/s390x/kvm.c
> +++ b/target/s390x/kvm.c
> @@ -1226,6 +1226,11 @@ static void kvm_sclp_service_call(S390CPU *cpu, struct
> kvm_run *run,
> sccb = env->regs[ipbh0 & 0xf];
> code = env->regs[(ipbh0 & 0xf0) >> 4];
>
> + if (run->s390_sieic.icptcode == ICPT_PV_INSTR) {
I still somewhat prefer checking for env->pv instead - similar to patch #9.
--
Thanks,
David / dhildenb
- Re: [PATCH v6 06/18] s390x: protvirt: Inhibit balloon when switching to protected mode, (continued)
- [PATCH v6 07/18] s390x: protvirt: KVM intercept changes, Janosch Frank, 2020/03/04
- [PATCH v6 05/18] s390x: protvirt: Handle diag 308 subcodes 0,1,3,4, Janosch Frank, 2020/03/04
- [PATCH v6 08/18] s390x: Add SIDA memory ops, Janosch Frank, 2020/03/04
- [PATCH v6 15/18] s390x: protvirt: Handle SIGP store status correctly, Janosch Frank, 2020/03/04
- [PATCH v6 10/18] s390x: protvirt: SCLP interpretation, Janosch Frank, 2020/03/04
- Re: [PATCH v6 10/18] s390x: protvirt: SCLP interpretation,
David Hildenbrand <=
- [PATCH v6 13/18] s390x: protvirt: Disable address checks for PV guest IO emulation, Janosch Frank, 2020/03/04
[PATCH v6 11/18] s390x: protvirt: Set guest IPL PSW, Janosch Frank, 2020/03/04