From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757454AbeDXNBn (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Apr 2018 09:01:43 -0400 Received: from mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.158.5]:44164 "EHLO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932502AbeDXNBj (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Apr 2018 09:01:39 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 03/15] KVM: s390: refactor crypto initialization To: Cornelia Huck Cc: Harald Freudenberger , Pierre Morel , alex.williamson@redhat.com, alifm@linux.vnet.ibm.com, berrange@redhat.com, bjsdjshi@linux.vnet.ibm.com, borntrae@linux.ibm.com, fiuczy@linux.vnet.ibm.com, heicars2@linux.vnet.ibm.com, jjherne@linux.vnet.ibm.com, kvm@vger.kernel.org, kwankhede@nvidia.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, mjrosato@linux.vnet.ibm.com, mschwid2@linux.vnet.ibm.com, pasic@linux.vnet.ibm.com, pbonzini@redhat.com, Reinhard Buendgen , thuth@redhat.com References: <1523827345-11600-1-git-send-email-akrowiak@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1523827345-11600-4-git-send-email-akrowiak@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <4fb50a31-1893-5cfb-0f35-fb2501c2afa8@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20180417121044.5c8f2182.cohuck@redhat.com> <2ac8b862-e2dc-843e-a0b8-906fa32b42f4@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20180417172139.0a2b148b.cohuck@redhat.com> <7276785e-2183-3204-ec80-99fba1546364@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20180418094949.0403dcaf.cohuck@redhat.com> <470d8af7-b9f6-0ab7-9bfa-351fbeaa079c@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20180423090337.1b8b465a.cohuck@redhat.com> From: Tony Krowiak Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 09:01:12 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20180423090337.1b8b465a.cohuck@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Language: en-US X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 x-cbid: 18042413-0024-0000-0000-0000184722FE X-IBM-SpamModules-Scores: X-IBM-SpamModules-Versions: BY=3.00008913; HX=3.00000241; KW=3.00000007; PH=3.00000004; SC=3.00000257; SDB=6.01022577; UDB=6.00521947; IPR=6.00801811; MB=3.00020749; MTD=3.00000008; XFM=3.00000015; UTC=2018-04-24 13:01:20 X-IBM-AV-DETECTION: SAVI=unused REMOTE=unused XFE=unused x-cbparentid: 18042413-0025-0000-0000-00004FA900F2 Message-Id: <192888a1-afc8-8502-5c6f-dbb16625bda2@linux.vnet.ibm.com> X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:,, definitions=2018-04-24_03:,, signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 impostorscore=0 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1709140000 definitions=main-1804240126 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 04/23/2018 03:03 AM, Cornelia Huck wrote: > On Sun, 22 Apr 2018 10:52:55 -0400 > Tony Krowiak wrote: > >>>>>>> (Not providing a crycb if APXA is not available would be loss of >>>>>>> functionality, I guess? Deciding not to provide vfio-ap if APXA is not >>>>>>> available is a different game, of course.) >>>>>> This would require a change to enabling the CPU model feature for >>>>>> AP. >>>>> But would it actually make sense to tie vfio-ap to APXA? This needs to >>>>> be answered by folks with access to the architecture :) >>>> I don't see any reason to do that from an architectural perspective. >>>> One can access AP devices whether APXA is installed or not, it just limits >>>> the range of devices that can be addressed >>> So I guess we should not introduce a tie-in then (unless it radically >>> simplifies the code...) >> I'm not clear about what you mean by introducing a tie-in. Can you >> clarify that? > Making vfio-ap depend on APXA. I don't think vfio-ap should be dependent upon APXA for the reasons I stated above. >