lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Aug]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH v9 21/22] KVM: s390: CPU model support for AP virtualization
From
Date
On 23/08/2018 09:48, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>>>>
>>> I really wonder if we should also export the APXA facility.
>>
>> Given this comment is made within the context of the
>> FACILITIES_KVM_CPUMODEL I might point out that APXA is not
>> indicated by a facilities bit. It is indicated by a bit in
>> the QCI control block returned from the PQAP(QCI)
>> instruction to indicate that APXA is installed on all CPUs.
>>
>>> We can probe and allow that CPU feature. However, we cannot disable it
>>> (as of now).
>>
>> Given this patch series implements passthrough devices,
>> the output of the PQAP(QCI) will always be from a real
>> device - i.e., there will be no way to disable it.
>>
>
> see below
>
>>>
>>> We have other CPU features where it is the same case (basically all
>>> subfunctions). See kvm_s390_get_processor_subfunc(). We probe them and
>>> export them, but support to disable them has never been implemented.
>>>
>>> On a high level, we could then e.g. deny to start a QEMU guest if APXA
>>> is available but has been disabled. (until we know that disabling it
>>> actually works - if ever).
>>>
>>> This helps to catch nasty migration bugs (e.g. APXA suddenly
>>> disappearing). Although unlikely, definitely possible.
>>
>> Migration of AP devices is not supported by this patch series, so this
>> should
>> not be an issue.
>
> Might not be a problem now, but could be later. As I said in a different
> reply, the CPU model in QEMU does not care about KVM.
>
> I want the QEMU CPU model and the KVM interfaces to be clean and future
> proof. That's why my opinion is to handle PQAP(QCI) just like all the
> other "feature blocks" we already have.
>

Don't you mix with the TAPQ instruction which has
a T bit to specify interception.
It indeed is not in the subfunction list even it
has a T bit to indicate interception.

TAPQ-t is indicated through the APFT facility.

We can use this bit as an indication of the presence
of APXA, the documentation mention that both are implemented together.

regards,
Pierre


--
Pierre Morel
Linux/KVM/QEMU in Böblingen - Germany

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-08-23 10:26    [W:0.201 / U:1.324 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site