|
From: | Thomas Huth |
Subject: | Re: [PATCH v3 2/3] s390x/pv: Introduce a s390_pv_check() helper for runtime |
Date: | Tue, 17 Jan 2023 08:59:07 +0100 |
User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.13.0 |
On 16/01/2023 18.46, Cédric Le Goater wrote:
From: Cédric Le Goater <clg@redhat.com> If a secure kernel is started in a non-protected VM, the OS will hang during boot without giving a proper error message to the user. Perform the checks on Confidential Guest support at runtime with an helper called from the service call switching the guest to protected mode. Signed-off-by: Cédric Le Goater <clg@redhat.com> --- In s390_pv_check(), drop the call to s390_pv_guest_check() since init time has already checked the same conditions. However, to report an error when the machine is not protected and the kernel secure, we still need s390_pv_check().
Basically Ack for this patch ... I'm just wondering whether we should maybe use a different name for the function. We now have s390_pv_guest_check() and 390_pv_check() ... hard to distinguish. Maybe we should call them s390_pv_initial_check() and s390_pv_runtime_check() (or s390_pv_diag308_check()) or something similar instead?
Thomas
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |