All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [PATCH v11 0/3] s390x: KVM: CPU Topology
@ 2022-07-01 16:25 Pierre Morel
  2022-07-01 16:25 ` [PATCH v11 1/3] KVM: s390: Cleanup ipte lock access and SIIF facility checks Pierre Morel
                   ` (2 more replies)
  0 siblings, 3 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: Pierre Morel @ 2022-07-01 16:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: kvm
  Cc: linux-s390, linux-kernel, borntraeger, frankja, cohuck, david,
	thuth, imbrenda, hca, gor, pmorel, wintera, seiden, nrb, scgl

Hi all,

This new spin suppress the check for real cpu migration and
modify the checking of valid function code inside the interception
of the STSI instruction.

The series provides:
0- Modification of the ipte lock handling to use KVM instead of the
   vcpu as an argument because ipte lock work on SCA which is uniq
   per KVM structure and common to all vCPUs.
1- interception of the STSI instruction forwarding the CPU topology
2- interpretation of the PTF instruction
3- a KVM capability for the userland hypervisor to ask KVM to 
   setup PTF interpretation.
4- KVM ioctl to get and set the MTCR bit of the SCA in order to
   migrate this bit during a migration.


0- Foreword

The S390 CPU topology is reported using two instructions:
- PTF, to get information if the CPU topology did change since last
  PTF instruction or a subsystem reset.
- STSI, to get the topology information, consisting of the topology
  of the CPU inside the sockets, of the sockets inside the books etc.

The PTF(2) instruction report a change if the STSI(15.1.2) instruction
will report a difference with the last STSI(15.1.2) instruction*.
With the SIE interpretation, the PTF(2) instruction will report a
change to the guest if the host sets the SCA.MTCR bit.

*The STSI(15.1.2) instruction reports:
- The cores address within a socket
- The polarization of the cores
- The CPU type of the cores
- If the cores are dedicated or not

We decided to implement the CPU topology for S390 in several steps:

- first we report CPU hotplug

In future development we will provide:

- modification of the CPU mask inside sockets
- handling of shared CPUs
- reporting of the CPU Type
- reporting of the polarization


1- Interception of STSI

To provide Topology information to the guest through the STSI
instruction, we forward STSI with Function Code 15 to the
userland hypervisor which will take care to provide the right
information to the guest.

To let the guest use both the PTF instruction  to check if a topology
change occurred and sthe STSI_15.x.x instruction we add a new KVM
capability to enable the topology facility.

2- Interpretation of PTF with FC(2)

The PTF instruction reports a topology change if there is any change
with a previous STSI(15.1.2) SYSIB.

Changes inside a STSI(15.1.2) SYSIB occur if CPU bits are set or clear
inside the CPU Topology List Entry CPU mask field, which happens with
changes in CPU polarization, dedication, CPU types and adding or
removing CPUs in a socket.

Considering that the KVM guests currently only supports:
- horizontal polarization
- type 3 (Linux) CPU

And that we decide to support only:
- dedicated CPUs on the host
- pinned vCPUs on the guest

the creation of vCPU will is the only trigger to set the MTCR bit for
a guest.

The reporting to the guest is done using the Multiprocessor
Topology-Change-Report (MTCR) bit of the utility entry of the guest's
SCA which will be cleared during the interpretation of PTF.

Regards,
Pierre

Pierre Morel (3):
  KVM: s390: Cleanup ipte lock access and SIIF facility checks
  KVM: s390: guest support for topology function
  KVM: s390: resetting the Topology-Change-Report

 Documentation/virt/kvm/api.rst   | 25 +++++++++
 arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h | 18 +++++-
 arch/s390/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h | 10 ++++
 arch/s390/kvm/gaccess.c          | 96 ++++++++++++++++----------------
 arch/s390/kvm/gaccess.h          |  6 +-
 arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c         | 89 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 arch/s390/kvm/priv.c             | 22 +++++---
 arch/s390/kvm/vsie.c             |  8 +++
 include/uapi/linux/kvm.h         |  1 +
 9 files changed, 214 insertions(+), 61 deletions(-)

-- 
2.31.1

Changelog:

from v10 to v11

- access mctr with interlocked access instead of ipte_lock
  (Janis)

- set mctr in kvm_arch_vcpu_destroy
  (Nico)

- better function documentation
  (Claudio)

- use a single function to set and clear
  (Janosch)

- Use u8 as API data
  (David, Janis)

- Check KVM_CAP_S390_USER_STSI before returning
  data to userspace
  (Nico)

from v9 to v10

- Suppression of the check on real CPU migration
  (Christian)

- Changed the check on fc in handle_stsi
  (David)

from v8 to v9

- bug correction in kvm_s390_topology_changed
  (Heiko)

- simplification for ipte_lock/unlock to use kvm
  as arg instead of vcpu and test on sclp.has_siif
  instead of the SIE ECA_SII.
  (David)

- use of a single value for reporting if the
  topology changed instead of a structure
  (David)

from v7 to v8

- implement reset handling
  (Janosch)

- change the way to check if the topology changed
  (Nico, Heiko)

from v6 to v7

- rebase

from v5 to v6

- make the subject more accurate
  (Claudio)

- Change the kvm_s390_set_mtcr() function to have vcpu in the name
  (Janosch)

- Replace the checks on ECB_PTF wit the check of facility 11
  (Janosch)

- modify kvm_arch_vcpu_load, move the check in a function in
  the header file
  (Janosh)

- No magical number replace the "new cpu value" of -1 with a define
  (Janosch)

- Make the checks for STSI validity clearer
  (Janosch)

from v4 tp v5

- modify the way KVM_CAP is tested to be OK with vsie
  (David)

from v3 to v4

- squatch both patches
  (David)

- Added Documentation
  (David)

- Modified the detection for new vCPUs
  (Pierre)

from v2 to v3

- use PTF interpretation
  (Christian)

- optimize arch_update_cpu_topology using PTF
  (Pierre)

from v1 to v2:

- Add a KVM capability to let QEMU know we support PTF and STSI 15
  (David)

- check KVM facility 11 before accepting STSI fc 15
  (David)

- handle all we can in userland
  (David)

- add tracing to STSI fc 15
  (Connie)


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread

* [PATCH v11 1/3] KVM: s390: Cleanup ipte lock access and SIIF facility checks
  2022-07-01 16:25 [PATCH v11 0/3] s390x: KVM: CPU Topology Pierre Morel
@ 2022-07-01 16:25 ` Pierre Morel
  2022-07-01 16:25 ` [PATCH v11 2/3] KVM: s390: guest support for topology function Pierre Morel
  2022-07-01 16:25 ` [PATCH v11 3/3] KVM: s390: resetting the Topology-Change-Report Pierre Morel
  2 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: Pierre Morel @ 2022-07-01 16:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: kvm
  Cc: linux-s390, linux-kernel, borntraeger, frankja, cohuck, david,
	thuth, imbrenda, hca, gor, pmorel, wintera, seiden, nrb, scgl

We can check if SIIF is enabled by testing the sclp_info struct
instead of testing the sie control block eca variable as that
facility is always enabled if available.

Also let's cleanup all the ipte related struct member accesses
which currently happen by referencing the KVM struct via the
VCPU struct.
Making the KVM struct the parameter to the ipte_* functions
removes one level of indirection which makes the code more readable.

Signed-off-by: Pierre Morel <pmorel@linux.ibm.com>
Reviewed-by: Janosch Frank <frankja@linux.ibm.com>
Reviewed-by: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Nico Boehr <nrb@linux.ibm.com>
---
 arch/s390/kvm/gaccess.c | 96 ++++++++++++++++++++---------------------
 arch/s390/kvm/gaccess.h |  6 +--
 arch/s390/kvm/priv.c    |  6 +--
 3 files changed, 54 insertions(+), 54 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/s390/kvm/gaccess.c b/arch/s390/kvm/gaccess.c
index 227ed0009354..082ec5f2c3a5 100644
--- a/arch/s390/kvm/gaccess.c
+++ b/arch/s390/kvm/gaccess.c
@@ -262,77 +262,77 @@ struct aste {
 	/* .. more fields there */
 };
 
-int ipte_lock_held(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
+int ipte_lock_held(struct kvm *kvm)
 {
-	if (vcpu->arch.sie_block->eca & ECA_SII) {
+	if (sclp.has_siif) {
 		int rc;
 
-		read_lock(&vcpu->kvm->arch.sca_lock);
-		rc = kvm_s390_get_ipte_control(vcpu->kvm)->kh != 0;
-		read_unlock(&vcpu->kvm->arch.sca_lock);
+		read_lock(&kvm->arch.sca_lock);
+		rc = kvm_s390_get_ipte_control(kvm)->kh != 0;
+		read_unlock(&kvm->arch.sca_lock);
 		return rc;
 	}
-	return vcpu->kvm->arch.ipte_lock_count != 0;
+	return kvm->arch.ipte_lock_count != 0;
 }
 
-static void ipte_lock_simple(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
+static void ipte_lock_simple(struct kvm *kvm)
 {
 	union ipte_control old, new, *ic;
 
-	mutex_lock(&vcpu->kvm->arch.ipte_mutex);
-	vcpu->kvm->arch.ipte_lock_count++;
-	if (vcpu->kvm->arch.ipte_lock_count > 1)
+	mutex_lock(&kvm->arch.ipte_mutex);
+	kvm->arch.ipte_lock_count++;
+	if (kvm->arch.ipte_lock_count > 1)
 		goto out;
 retry:
-	read_lock(&vcpu->kvm->arch.sca_lock);
-	ic = kvm_s390_get_ipte_control(vcpu->kvm);
+	read_lock(&kvm->arch.sca_lock);
+	ic = kvm_s390_get_ipte_control(kvm);
 	do {
 		old = READ_ONCE(*ic);
 		if (old.k) {
-			read_unlock(&vcpu->kvm->arch.sca_lock);
+			read_unlock(&kvm->arch.sca_lock);
 			cond_resched();
 			goto retry;
 		}
 		new = old;
 		new.k = 1;
 	} while (cmpxchg(&ic->val, old.val, new.val) != old.val);
-	read_unlock(&vcpu->kvm->arch.sca_lock);
+	read_unlock(&kvm->arch.sca_lock);
 out:
-	mutex_unlock(&vcpu->kvm->arch.ipte_mutex);
+	mutex_unlock(&kvm->arch.ipte_mutex);
 }
 
-static void ipte_unlock_simple(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
+static void ipte_unlock_simple(struct kvm *kvm)
 {
 	union ipte_control old, new, *ic;
 
-	mutex_lock(&vcpu->kvm->arch.ipte_mutex);
-	vcpu->kvm->arch.ipte_lock_count--;
-	if (vcpu->kvm->arch.ipte_lock_count)
+	mutex_lock(&kvm->arch.ipte_mutex);
+	kvm->arch.ipte_lock_count--;
+	if (kvm->arch.ipte_lock_count)
 		goto out;
-	read_lock(&vcpu->kvm->arch.sca_lock);
-	ic = kvm_s390_get_ipte_control(vcpu->kvm);
+	read_lock(&kvm->arch.sca_lock);
+	ic = kvm_s390_get_ipte_control(kvm);
 	do {
 		old = READ_ONCE(*ic);
 		new = old;
 		new.k = 0;
 	} while (cmpxchg(&ic->val, old.val, new.val) != old.val);
-	read_unlock(&vcpu->kvm->arch.sca_lock);
-	wake_up(&vcpu->kvm->arch.ipte_wq);
+	read_unlock(&kvm->arch.sca_lock);
+	wake_up(&kvm->arch.ipte_wq);
 out:
-	mutex_unlock(&vcpu->kvm->arch.ipte_mutex);
+	mutex_unlock(&kvm->arch.ipte_mutex);
 }
 
-static void ipte_lock_siif(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
+static void ipte_lock_siif(struct kvm *kvm)
 {
 	union ipte_control old, new, *ic;
 
 retry:
-	read_lock(&vcpu->kvm->arch.sca_lock);
-	ic = kvm_s390_get_ipte_control(vcpu->kvm);
+	read_lock(&kvm->arch.sca_lock);
+	ic = kvm_s390_get_ipte_control(kvm);
 	do {
 		old = READ_ONCE(*ic);
 		if (old.kg) {
-			read_unlock(&vcpu->kvm->arch.sca_lock);
+			read_unlock(&kvm->arch.sca_lock);
 			cond_resched();
 			goto retry;
 		}
@@ -340,15 +340,15 @@ static void ipte_lock_siif(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
 		new.k = 1;
 		new.kh++;
 	} while (cmpxchg(&ic->val, old.val, new.val) != old.val);
-	read_unlock(&vcpu->kvm->arch.sca_lock);
+	read_unlock(&kvm->arch.sca_lock);
 }
 
-static void ipte_unlock_siif(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
+static void ipte_unlock_siif(struct kvm *kvm)
 {
 	union ipte_control old, new, *ic;
 
-	read_lock(&vcpu->kvm->arch.sca_lock);
-	ic = kvm_s390_get_ipte_control(vcpu->kvm);
+	read_lock(&kvm->arch.sca_lock);
+	ic = kvm_s390_get_ipte_control(kvm);
 	do {
 		old = READ_ONCE(*ic);
 		new = old;
@@ -356,25 +356,25 @@ static void ipte_unlock_siif(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
 		if (!new.kh)
 			new.k = 0;
 	} while (cmpxchg(&ic->val, old.val, new.val) != old.val);
-	read_unlock(&vcpu->kvm->arch.sca_lock);
+	read_unlock(&kvm->arch.sca_lock);
 	if (!new.kh)
-		wake_up(&vcpu->kvm->arch.ipte_wq);
+		wake_up(&kvm->arch.ipte_wq);
 }
 
-void ipte_lock(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
+void ipte_lock(struct kvm *kvm)
 {
-	if (vcpu->arch.sie_block->eca & ECA_SII)
-		ipte_lock_siif(vcpu);
+	if (sclp.has_siif)
+		ipte_lock_siif(kvm);
 	else
-		ipte_lock_simple(vcpu);
+		ipte_lock_simple(kvm);
 }
 
-void ipte_unlock(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
+void ipte_unlock(struct kvm *kvm)
 {
-	if (vcpu->arch.sie_block->eca & ECA_SII)
-		ipte_unlock_siif(vcpu);
+	if (sclp.has_siif)
+		ipte_unlock_siif(kvm);
 	else
-		ipte_unlock_simple(vcpu);
+		ipte_unlock_simple(kvm);
 }
 
 static int ar_translation(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, union asce *asce, u8 ar,
@@ -1086,7 +1086,7 @@ int access_guest_with_key(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, unsigned long ga, u8 ar,
 	try_storage_prot_override = storage_prot_override_applicable(vcpu);
 	need_ipte_lock = psw_bits(*psw).dat && !asce.r;
 	if (need_ipte_lock)
-		ipte_lock(vcpu);
+		ipte_lock(vcpu->kvm);
 	/*
 	 * Since we do the access further down ultimately via a move instruction
 	 * that does key checking and returns an error in case of a protection
@@ -1127,7 +1127,7 @@ int access_guest_with_key(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, unsigned long ga, u8 ar,
 	}
 out_unlock:
 	if (need_ipte_lock)
-		ipte_unlock(vcpu);
+		ipte_unlock(vcpu->kvm);
 	if (nr_pages > ARRAY_SIZE(gpa_array))
 		vfree(gpas);
 	return rc;
@@ -1199,10 +1199,10 @@ int check_gva_range(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, unsigned long gva, u8 ar,
 	rc = get_vcpu_asce(vcpu, &asce, gva, ar, mode);
 	if (rc)
 		return rc;
-	ipte_lock(vcpu);
+	ipte_lock(vcpu->kvm);
 	rc = guest_range_to_gpas(vcpu, gva, ar, NULL, length, asce, mode,
 				 access_key);
-	ipte_unlock(vcpu);
+	ipte_unlock(vcpu->kvm);
 
 	return rc;
 }
@@ -1465,7 +1465,7 @@ int kvm_s390_shadow_fault(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct gmap *sg,
 	 * tables/pointers we read stay valid - unshadowing is however
 	 * always possible - only guest_table_lock protects us.
 	 */
-	ipte_lock(vcpu);
+	ipte_lock(vcpu->kvm);
 
 	rc = gmap_shadow_pgt_lookup(sg, saddr, &pgt, &dat_protection, &fake);
 	if (rc)
@@ -1499,7 +1499,7 @@ int kvm_s390_shadow_fault(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct gmap *sg,
 	pte.p |= dat_protection;
 	if (!rc)
 		rc = gmap_shadow_page(sg, saddr, __pte(pte.val));
-	ipte_unlock(vcpu);
+	ipte_unlock(vcpu->kvm);
 	mmap_read_unlock(sg->mm);
 	return rc;
 }
diff --git a/arch/s390/kvm/gaccess.h b/arch/s390/kvm/gaccess.h
index 1124ff282012..9408d6cc8e2c 100644
--- a/arch/s390/kvm/gaccess.h
+++ b/arch/s390/kvm/gaccess.h
@@ -440,9 +440,9 @@ int read_guest_real(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, unsigned long gra, void *data,
 	return access_guest_real(vcpu, gra, data, len, 0);
 }
 
-void ipte_lock(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu);
-void ipte_unlock(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu);
-int ipte_lock_held(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu);
+void ipte_lock(struct kvm *kvm);
+void ipte_unlock(struct kvm *kvm);
+int ipte_lock_held(struct kvm *kvm);
 int kvm_s390_check_low_addr_prot_real(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, unsigned long gra);
 
 /* MVPG PEI indication bits */
diff --git a/arch/s390/kvm/priv.c b/arch/s390/kvm/priv.c
index 83bb5cf97282..12c464c7cddf 100644
--- a/arch/s390/kvm/priv.c
+++ b/arch/s390/kvm/priv.c
@@ -442,7 +442,7 @@ static int handle_ipte_interlock(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
 	vcpu->stat.instruction_ipte_interlock++;
 	if (psw_bits(vcpu->arch.sie_block->gpsw).pstate)
 		return kvm_s390_inject_program_int(vcpu, PGM_PRIVILEGED_OP);
-	wait_event(vcpu->kvm->arch.ipte_wq, !ipte_lock_held(vcpu));
+	wait_event(vcpu->kvm->arch.ipte_wq, !ipte_lock_held(vcpu->kvm));
 	kvm_s390_retry_instr(vcpu);
 	VCPU_EVENT(vcpu, 4, "%s", "retrying ipte interlock operation");
 	return 0;
@@ -1471,7 +1471,7 @@ static int handle_tprot(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
 	access_key = (operand2 & 0xf0) >> 4;
 
 	if (vcpu->arch.sie_block->gpsw.mask & PSW_MASK_DAT)
-		ipte_lock(vcpu);
+		ipte_lock(vcpu->kvm);
 
 	ret = guest_translate_address_with_key(vcpu, address, ar, &gpa,
 					       GACC_STORE, access_key);
@@ -1508,7 +1508,7 @@ static int handle_tprot(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
 	}
 
 	if (vcpu->arch.sie_block->gpsw.mask & PSW_MASK_DAT)
-		ipte_unlock(vcpu);
+		ipte_unlock(vcpu->kvm);
 	return ret;
 }
 
-- 
2.31.1


^ permalink raw reply related	[flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread

* [PATCH v11 2/3] KVM: s390: guest support for topology function
  2022-07-01 16:25 [PATCH v11 0/3] s390x: KVM: CPU Topology Pierre Morel
  2022-07-01 16:25 ` [PATCH v11 1/3] KVM: s390: Cleanup ipte lock access and SIIF facility checks Pierre Morel
@ 2022-07-01 16:25 ` Pierre Morel
  2022-07-04  8:46   ` Janosch Frank
  2022-07-04  9:08   ` Janis Schoetterl-Glausch
  2022-07-01 16:25 ` [PATCH v11 3/3] KVM: s390: resetting the Topology-Change-Report Pierre Morel
  2 siblings, 2 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: Pierre Morel @ 2022-07-01 16:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: kvm
  Cc: linux-s390, linux-kernel, borntraeger, frankja, cohuck, david,
	thuth, imbrenda, hca, gor, pmorel, wintera, seiden, nrb, scgl

We report a topology change to the guest for any CPU hotplug.

The reporting to the guest is done using the Multiprocessor
Topology-Change-Report (MTCR) bit of the utility entry in the guest's
SCA which will be cleared during the interpretation of PTF.

On every vCPU creation we set the MCTR bit to let the guest know the
next time he uses the PTF with command 2 instruction that the
topology changed and that he should use the STSI(15.1.x) instruction
to get the topology details.

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>
Reviewed-by: Nico Boehr <nrb@linux.ibm.com>
---
 arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h | 18 +++++++++++++---
 arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c         | 36 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 arch/s390/kvm/priv.c             | 16 ++++++++++----
 arch/s390/kvm/vsie.c             |  8 +++++++
 4 files changed, 71 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h b/arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h
index 766028d54a3e..ae6bd3d607de 100644
--- a/arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h
+++ b/arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h
@@ -93,19 +93,30 @@ union ipte_control {
 	};
 };
 
+union sca_utility {
+	__u16 val;
+	struct {
+		__u16 mtcr : 1;
+		__u16 reserved : 15;
+	};
+};
+
 struct bsca_block {
 	union ipte_control ipte_control;
 	__u64	reserved[5];
 	__u64	mcn;
-	__u64	reserved2;
+	union sca_utility utility;
+	__u8	reserved2[6];
 	struct bsca_entry cpu[KVM_S390_BSCA_CPU_SLOTS];
 };
 
 struct esca_block {
 	union ipte_control ipte_control;
-	__u64   reserved1[7];
+	__u64   reserved1[6];
+	union sca_utility utility;
+	__u8	reserved2[6];
 	__u64   mcn[4];
-	__u64   reserved2[20];
+	__u64   reserved3[20];
 	struct esca_entry cpu[KVM_S390_ESCA_CPU_SLOTS];
 };
 
@@ -249,6 +260,7 @@ struct kvm_s390_sie_block {
 #define ECB_SPECI	0x08
 #define ECB_SRSI	0x04
 #define ECB_HOSTPROTINT	0x02
+#define ECB_PTF		0x01
 	__u8	ecb;			/* 0x0061 */
 #define ECB2_CMMA	0x80
 #define ECB2_IEP	0x20
diff --git a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
index 8fcb56141689..ee59b03f2e45 100644
--- a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
+++ b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
@@ -1691,6 +1691,31 @@ static int kvm_s390_get_cpu_model(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_device_attr *attr)
 	return ret;
 }
 
+/**
+ * kvm_s390_update_topology_change_report - update CPU topology change report
+ * @kvm: guest KVM description
+ * @val: set or clear the MTCR bit
+ *
+ * Updates the Multiprocessor Topology-Change-Report bit to signal
+ * the guest with a topology change.
+ * This is only relevant if the topology facility is present.
+ *
+ * The SCA version, bsca or esca, doesn't matter as offset is the same.
+ */
+static void kvm_s390_update_topology_change_report(struct kvm *kvm, bool val)
+{
+	struct bsca_block *sca = kvm->arch.sca;
+	union sca_utility new, old;
+
+	read_lock(&kvm->arch.sca_lock);
+	do {
+		old = READ_ONCE(sca->utility);
+		new = old;
+		new.mtcr = val;
+	} while (cmpxchg(&sca->utility.val, old.val, new.val) != old.val);
+	read_unlock(&kvm->arch.sca_lock);
+}
+
 static int kvm_s390_vm_set_attr(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_device_attr *attr)
 {
 	int ret;
@@ -2877,6 +2902,7 @@ void kvm_arch_vcpu_destroy(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
 	kvm_clear_async_pf_completion_queue(vcpu);
 	if (!kvm_is_ucontrol(vcpu->kvm))
 		sca_del_vcpu(vcpu);
+	kvm_s390_update_topology_change_report(vcpu->kvm, 1);
 
 	if (kvm_is_ucontrol(vcpu->kvm))
 		gmap_remove(vcpu->arch.gmap);
@@ -3272,6 +3298,14 @@ static int kvm_s390_vcpu_setup(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
 		vcpu->arch.sie_block->ecb |= ECB_HOSTPROTINT;
 	if (test_kvm_facility(vcpu->kvm, 9))
 		vcpu->arch.sie_block->ecb |= ECB_SRSI;
+	/*
+	 * CPU Topology
+	 * This facility only uses the utility field of the SCA and none
+	 * of the cpu entries that are problematic with the other
+	 * interpretation facilities so we can pass it through.
+	 */
+	if (test_kvm_facility(vcpu->kvm, 11))
+		vcpu->arch.sie_block->ecb |= ECB_PTF;
 	if (test_kvm_facility(vcpu->kvm, 73))
 		vcpu->arch.sie_block->ecb |= ECB_TE;
 	if (!kvm_is_ucontrol(vcpu->kvm))
@@ -3403,6 +3437,8 @@ int kvm_arch_vcpu_create(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
 	rc = kvm_s390_vcpu_setup(vcpu);
 	if (rc)
 		goto out_ucontrol_uninit;
+
+	kvm_s390_update_topology_change_report(vcpu->kvm, 1);
 	return 0;
 
 out_ucontrol_uninit:
diff --git a/arch/s390/kvm/priv.c b/arch/s390/kvm/priv.c
index 12c464c7cddf..046afee1be94 100644
--- a/arch/s390/kvm/priv.c
+++ b/arch/s390/kvm/priv.c
@@ -873,10 +873,13 @@ 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) {
-		kvm_s390_set_psw_cc(vcpu, 3);
-		return 0;
-	}
+	/* Bailout forbidden function codes */
+	if (fc > 3 && (fc != 15 || kvm_s390_pv_cpu_is_protected(vcpu)))
+		goto out_no_data;
+
+	/* fc 15 is provided with PTF/CPU topology support */
+	if (fc == 15 && !test_kvm_facility(vcpu->kvm, 11))
+		goto out_no_data;
 
 	if (vcpu->run->s.regs.gprs[0] & 0x0fffff00
 	    || vcpu->run->s.regs.gprs[1] & 0xffff0000)
@@ -910,6 +913,11 @@ static int handle_stsi(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
 			goto out_no_data;
 		handle_stsi_3_2_2(vcpu, (void *) mem);
 		break;
+	case 15: /* fc 15 is fully handled in userspace */
+		if (vcpu->kvm->arch.user_stsi)
+			insert_stsi_usr_data(vcpu, operand2, ar, fc, sel1, sel2);
+		trace_kvm_s390_handle_stsi(vcpu, fc, sel1, sel2, operand2);
+		return -EREMOTE;
 	}
 	if (kvm_s390_pv_cpu_is_protected(vcpu)) {
 		memcpy((void *)sida_origin(vcpu->arch.sie_block), (void *)mem,
diff --git a/arch/s390/kvm/vsie.c b/arch/s390/kvm/vsie.c
index dada78b92691..94138f8f0c1c 100644
--- a/arch/s390/kvm/vsie.c
+++ b/arch/s390/kvm/vsie.c
@@ -503,6 +503,14 @@ static int shadow_scb(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct vsie_page *vsie_page)
 	/* Host-protection-interruption introduced with ESOP */
 	if (test_kvm_cpu_feat(vcpu->kvm, KVM_S390_VM_CPU_FEAT_ESOP))
 		scb_s->ecb |= scb_o->ecb & ECB_HOSTPROTINT;
+	/*
+	 * CPU Topology
+	 * This facility only uses the utility field of the SCA and none of
+	 * the cpu entries that are problematic with the other interpretation
+	 * facilities so we can pass it through
+	 */
+	if (test_kvm_facility(vcpu->kvm, 11))
+		scb_s->ecb |= scb_o->ecb & ECB_PTF;
 	/* transactional execution */
 	if (test_kvm_facility(vcpu->kvm, 73) && wants_tx) {
 		/* remap the prefix is tx is toggled on */
-- 
2.31.1


^ permalink raw reply related	[flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread

* [PATCH v11 3/3] KVM: s390: resetting the Topology-Change-Report
  2022-07-01 16:25 [PATCH v11 0/3] s390x: KVM: CPU Topology Pierre Morel
  2022-07-01 16:25 ` [PATCH v11 1/3] KVM: s390: Cleanup ipte lock access and SIIF facility checks Pierre Morel
  2022-07-01 16:25 ` [PATCH v11 2/3] KVM: s390: guest support for topology function Pierre Morel
@ 2022-07-01 16:25 ` Pierre Morel
  2022-07-04  9:35   ` Janis Schoetterl-Glausch
  2 siblings, 1 reply; 15+ messages in thread
From: Pierre Morel @ 2022-07-01 16:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: kvm
  Cc: linux-s390, linux-kernel, borntraeger, frankja, cohuck, david,
	thuth, imbrenda, hca, gor, pmorel, wintera, seiden, nrb, scgl

During a subsystem reset the Topology-Change-Report is cleared.

Let's give userland the possibility to clear the MTCR in the case
of a subsystem reset.

To migrate the MTCR, we give userland the possibility to
query the MTCR state.

We indicate KVM support for the CPU topology facility with a new
KVM capability: KVM_CAP_S390_CPU_TOPOLOGY.

Signed-off-by: Pierre Morel <pmorel@linux.ibm.com>
---
 Documentation/virt/kvm/api.rst   | 25 +++++++++++++++
 arch/s390/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h | 10 ++++++
 arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c         | 53 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 include/uapi/linux/kvm.h         |  1 +
 4 files changed, 89 insertions(+)

diff --git a/Documentation/virt/kvm/api.rst b/Documentation/virt/kvm/api.rst
index 11e00a46c610..5e086125d8ad 100644
--- a/Documentation/virt/kvm/api.rst
+++ b/Documentation/virt/kvm/api.rst
@@ -7956,6 +7956,31 @@ should adjust CPUID leaf 0xA to reflect that the PMU is disabled.
 When enabled, KVM will exit to userspace with KVM_EXIT_SYSTEM_EVENT of
 type KVM_SYSTEM_EVENT_SUSPEND to process the guest suspend request.
 
+8.37 KVM_CAP_S390_CPU_TOPOLOGY
+------------------------------
+
+:Capability: KVM_CAP_S390_CPU_TOPOLOGY
+:Architectures: s390
+:Type: vm
+
+This capability indicates that KVM will provide the S390 CPU Topology
+facility which consist of the interpretation of the PTF instruction for
+the function code 2 along with interception and forwarding of both the
+PTF instruction with function codes 0 or 1 and the STSI(15,1,x)
+instruction to the userland hypervisor.
+
+The stfle facility 11, CPU Topology facility, should not be indicated
+to the guest without this capability.
+
+When this capability is present, KVM provides a new attribute group
+on vm fd, KVM_S390_VM_CPU_TOPOLOGY.
+This new attribute allows to get, set or clear the Modified Change
+Topology Report (MTCR) bit of the SCA through the kvm_device_attr
+structure.
+
+When getting the Modified Change Topology Report value, the attr->addr
+must point to a byte where the value will be stored.
+
 9. Known KVM API problems
 =========================
 
diff --git a/arch/s390/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h b/arch/s390/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h
index 7a6b14874d65..df5e8279ffd0 100644
--- a/arch/s390/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h
+++ b/arch/s390/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h
@@ -74,6 +74,7 @@ struct kvm_s390_io_adapter_req {
 #define KVM_S390_VM_CRYPTO		2
 #define KVM_S390_VM_CPU_MODEL		3
 #define KVM_S390_VM_MIGRATION		4
+#define KVM_S390_VM_CPU_TOPOLOGY	5
 
 /* kvm attributes for mem_ctrl */
 #define KVM_S390_VM_MEM_ENABLE_CMMA	0
@@ -171,6 +172,15 @@ struct kvm_s390_vm_cpu_subfunc {
 #define KVM_S390_VM_MIGRATION_START	1
 #define KVM_S390_VM_MIGRATION_STATUS	2
 
+/* kvm attributes for cpu topology */
+#define KVM_S390_VM_CPU_TOPO_MTCR_CLEAR	0
+#define KVM_S390_VM_CPU_TOPO_MTCR_SET	1
+
+struct kvm_cpu_topology {
+	__u16 mtcr : 1;
+	__u16 reserved : 15;
+};
+
 /* for KVM_GET_REGS and KVM_SET_REGS */
 struct kvm_regs {
 	/* general purpose regs for s390 */
diff --git a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
index ee59b03f2e45..5029fe40adbd 100644
--- a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
+++ b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
@@ -606,6 +606,9 @@ int kvm_vm_ioctl_check_extension(struct kvm *kvm, long ext)
 	case KVM_CAP_S390_PROTECTED:
 		r = is_prot_virt_host();
 		break;
+	case KVM_CAP_S390_CPU_TOPOLOGY:
+		r = test_facility(11);
+		break;
 	default:
 		r = 0;
 	}
@@ -817,6 +820,20 @@ int kvm_vm_ioctl_enable_cap(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_enable_cap *cap)
 		icpt_operexc_on_all_vcpus(kvm);
 		r = 0;
 		break;
+	case KVM_CAP_S390_CPU_TOPOLOGY:
+		r = -EINVAL;
+		mutex_lock(&kvm->lock);
+		if (kvm->created_vcpus) {
+			r = -EBUSY;
+		} else if (test_facility(11)) {
+			set_kvm_facility(kvm->arch.model.fac_mask, 11);
+			set_kvm_facility(kvm->arch.model.fac_list, 11);
+			r = 0;
+		}
+		mutex_unlock(&kvm->lock);
+		VM_EVENT(kvm, 3, "ENABLE: CPU TOPOLOGY %s",
+			 r ? "(not available)" : "(success)");
+		break;
 	default:
 		r = -EINVAL;
 		break;
@@ -1716,6 +1733,33 @@ static void kvm_s390_update_topology_change_report(struct kvm *kvm, bool val)
 	read_unlock(&kvm->arch.sca_lock);
 }
 
+static int kvm_s390_set_topology(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_device_attr *attr)
+{
+	if (!test_kvm_facility(kvm, 11))
+		return -ENXIO;
+
+	kvm_s390_update_topology_change_report(kvm, !!attr->attr);
+	return 0;
+}
+
+static int kvm_s390_get_topology(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_device_attr *attr)
+{
+	union sca_utility utility;
+	struct bsca_block *sca = kvm->arch.sca;
+	__u8 topo;
+
+	if (!test_kvm_facility(kvm, 11))
+		return -ENXIO;
+
+	utility.val = READ_ONCE(sca->utility.val);
+	topo = utility.mtcr;
+
+	if (copy_to_user((void __user *)attr->addr, &topo, sizeof(topo)))
+		return -EFAULT;
+
+	return 0;
+}
+
 static int kvm_s390_vm_set_attr(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_device_attr *attr)
 {
 	int ret;
@@ -1736,6 +1780,9 @@ static int kvm_s390_vm_set_attr(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_device_attr *attr)
 	case KVM_S390_VM_MIGRATION:
 		ret = kvm_s390_vm_set_migration(kvm, attr);
 		break;
+	case KVM_S390_VM_CPU_TOPOLOGY:
+		ret = kvm_s390_set_topology(kvm, attr);
+		break;
 	default:
 		ret = -ENXIO;
 		break;
@@ -1761,6 +1808,9 @@ static int kvm_s390_vm_get_attr(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_device_attr *attr)
 	case KVM_S390_VM_MIGRATION:
 		ret = kvm_s390_vm_get_migration(kvm, attr);
 		break;
+	case KVM_S390_VM_CPU_TOPOLOGY:
+		ret = kvm_s390_get_topology(kvm, attr);
+		break;
 	default:
 		ret = -ENXIO;
 		break;
@@ -1834,6 +1884,9 @@ static int kvm_s390_vm_has_attr(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_device_attr *attr)
 	case KVM_S390_VM_MIGRATION:
 		ret = 0;
 		break;
+	case KVM_S390_VM_CPU_TOPOLOGY:
+		ret = test_kvm_facility(kvm, 11) ? 0 : -ENXIO;
+		break;
 	default:
 		ret = -ENXIO;
 		break;
diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/kvm.h b/include/uapi/linux/kvm.h
index 5088bd9f1922..33317d820032 100644
--- a/include/uapi/linux/kvm.h
+++ b/include/uapi/linux/kvm.h
@@ -1157,6 +1157,7 @@ struct kvm_ppc_resize_hpt {
 #define KVM_CAP_VM_TSC_CONTROL 214
 #define KVM_CAP_SYSTEM_EVENT_DATA 215
 #define KVM_CAP_ARM_SYSTEM_SUSPEND 216
+#define KVM_CAP_S390_CPU_TOPOLOGY 217
 
 #ifdef KVM_CAP_IRQ_ROUTING
 
-- 
2.31.1


^ permalink raw reply related	[flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH v11 2/3] KVM: s390: guest support for topology function
  2022-07-01 16:25 ` [PATCH v11 2/3] KVM: s390: guest support for topology function Pierre Morel
@ 2022-07-04  8:46   ` Janosch Frank
  2022-07-04  9:08   ` Janis Schoetterl-Glausch
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: Janosch Frank @ 2022-07-04  8:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Pierre Morel, kvm
  Cc: linux-s390, linux-kernel, borntraeger, cohuck, david, thuth,
	imbrenda, hca, gor, wintera, seiden, nrb, scgl

On 7/1/22 18:25, Pierre Morel wrote:
> We report a topology change to the guest for any CPU hotplug.
> 
> The reporting to the guest is done using the Multiprocessor
> Topology-Change-Report (MTCR) bit of the utility entry in the guest's
> SCA which will be cleared during the interpretation of PTF.
> 
> On every vCPU creation we set the MCTR bit to let the guest know the
> next time he uses the PTF with command 2 instruction that the
> topology changed and that he should use the STSI(15.1.x) instruction
> to get the topology details.
> 
> 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>
> Reviewed-by: Nico Boehr <nrb@linux.ibm.com>

Reviewed-by: Janosch Frank <frankja@linux.ibm.com>

> ---
>   arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h | 18 +++++++++++++---
>   arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c         | 36 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>   arch/s390/kvm/priv.c             | 16 ++++++++++----
>   arch/s390/kvm/vsie.c             |  8 +++++++
>   4 files changed, 71 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h b/arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> index 766028d54a3e..ae6bd3d607de 100644
> --- a/arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> +++ b/arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> @@ -93,19 +93,30 @@ union ipte_control {
>   	};
>   };
>   
> +union sca_utility {
> +	__u16 val;
> +	struct {
> +		__u16 mtcr : 1;
> +		__u16 reserved : 15;
> +	};
> +};
> +
>   struct bsca_block {
>   	union ipte_control ipte_control;
>   	__u64	reserved[5];
>   	__u64	mcn;
> -	__u64	reserved2;
> +	union sca_utility utility;
> +	__u8	reserved2[6];
>   	struct bsca_entry cpu[KVM_S390_BSCA_CPU_SLOTS];
>   };
>   
>   struct esca_block {
>   	union ipte_control ipte_control;
> -	__u64   reserved1[7];
> +	__u64   reserved1[6];
> +	union sca_utility utility;
> +	__u8	reserved2[6];
>   	__u64   mcn[4];
> -	__u64   reserved2[20];
> +	__u64   reserved3[20];
>   	struct esca_entry cpu[KVM_S390_ESCA_CPU_SLOTS];
>   };
>   
> @@ -249,6 +260,7 @@ struct kvm_s390_sie_block {
>   #define ECB_SPECI	0x08
>   #define ECB_SRSI	0x04
>   #define ECB_HOSTPROTINT	0x02
> +#define ECB_PTF		0x01
>   	__u8	ecb;			/* 0x0061 */
>   #define ECB2_CMMA	0x80
>   #define ECB2_IEP	0x20
> diff --git a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
> index 8fcb56141689..ee59b03f2e45 100644
> --- a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
> +++ b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
> @@ -1691,6 +1691,31 @@ static int kvm_s390_get_cpu_model(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_device_attr *attr)
>   	return ret;
>   }
>   
> +/**
> + * kvm_s390_update_topology_change_report - update CPU topology change report
> + * @kvm: guest KVM description
> + * @val: set or clear the MTCR bit
> + *
> + * Updates the Multiprocessor Topology-Change-Report bit to signal
> + * the guest with a topology change.
> + * This is only relevant if the topology facility is present.
> + *
> + * The SCA version, bsca or esca, doesn't matter as offset is the same.
> + */
> +static void kvm_s390_update_topology_change_report(struct kvm *kvm, bool val)
> +{
> +	struct bsca_block *sca = kvm->arch.sca;
> +	union sca_utility new, old;
> +
> +	read_lock(&kvm->arch.sca_lock);
> +	do {
> +		old = READ_ONCE(sca->utility);
> +		new = old;
> +		new.mtcr = val;
> +	} while (cmpxchg(&sca->utility.val, old.val, new.val) != old.val);
> +	read_unlock(&kvm->arch.sca_lock);
> +}
> +
>   static int kvm_s390_vm_set_attr(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_device_attr *attr)
>   {
>   	int ret;
> @@ -2877,6 +2902,7 @@ void kvm_arch_vcpu_destroy(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>   	kvm_clear_async_pf_completion_queue(vcpu);
>   	if (!kvm_is_ucontrol(vcpu->kvm))
>   		sca_del_vcpu(vcpu);
> +	kvm_s390_update_topology_change_report(vcpu->kvm, 1);
>   
>   	if (kvm_is_ucontrol(vcpu->kvm))
>   		gmap_remove(vcpu->arch.gmap);
> @@ -3272,6 +3298,14 @@ static int kvm_s390_vcpu_setup(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>   		vcpu->arch.sie_block->ecb |= ECB_HOSTPROTINT;
>   	if (test_kvm_facility(vcpu->kvm, 9))
>   		vcpu->arch.sie_block->ecb |= ECB_SRSI;
> +	/*
> +	 * CPU Topology
> +	 * This facility only uses the utility field of the SCA and none
> +	 * of the cpu entries that are problematic with the other
> +	 * interpretation facilities so we can pass it through.
> +	 */
> +	if (test_kvm_facility(vcpu->kvm, 11))
> +		vcpu->arch.sie_block->ecb |= ECB_PTF;
>   	if (test_kvm_facility(vcpu->kvm, 73))
>   		vcpu->arch.sie_block->ecb |= ECB_TE;
>   	if (!kvm_is_ucontrol(vcpu->kvm))
> @@ -3403,6 +3437,8 @@ int kvm_arch_vcpu_create(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>   	rc = kvm_s390_vcpu_setup(vcpu);
>   	if (rc)
>   		goto out_ucontrol_uninit;
> +
> +	kvm_s390_update_topology_change_report(vcpu->kvm, 1);
>   	return 0;
>   
>   out_ucontrol_uninit:
> diff --git a/arch/s390/kvm/priv.c b/arch/s390/kvm/priv.c
> index 12c464c7cddf..046afee1be94 100644
> --- a/arch/s390/kvm/priv.c
> +++ b/arch/s390/kvm/priv.c
> @@ -873,10 +873,13 @@ 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) {
> -		kvm_s390_set_psw_cc(vcpu, 3);
> -		return 0;
> -	}
> +	/* Bailout forbidden function codes */
> +	if (fc > 3 && (fc != 15 || kvm_s390_pv_cpu_is_protected(vcpu)))
> +		goto out_no_data;
> +
> +	/* fc 15 is provided with PTF/CPU topology support */
> +	if (fc == 15 && !test_kvm_facility(vcpu->kvm, 11))
> +		goto out_no_data;
>   
>   	if (vcpu->run->s.regs.gprs[0] & 0x0fffff00
>   	    || vcpu->run->s.regs.gprs[1] & 0xffff0000)
> @@ -910,6 +913,11 @@ static int handle_stsi(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>   			goto out_no_data;
>   		handle_stsi_3_2_2(vcpu, (void *) mem);
>   		break;
> +	case 15: /* fc 15 is fully handled in userspace */
> +		if (vcpu->kvm->arch.user_stsi)
> +			insert_stsi_usr_data(vcpu, operand2, ar, fc, sel1, sel2);
> +		trace_kvm_s390_handle_stsi(vcpu, fc, sel1, sel2, operand2);
> +		return -EREMOTE;
>   	}
>   	if (kvm_s390_pv_cpu_is_protected(vcpu)) {
>   		memcpy((void *)sida_origin(vcpu->arch.sie_block), (void *)mem,
> diff --git a/arch/s390/kvm/vsie.c b/arch/s390/kvm/vsie.c
> index dada78b92691..94138f8f0c1c 100644
> --- a/arch/s390/kvm/vsie.c
> +++ b/arch/s390/kvm/vsie.c
> @@ -503,6 +503,14 @@ static int shadow_scb(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct vsie_page *vsie_page)
>   	/* Host-protection-interruption introduced with ESOP */
>   	if (test_kvm_cpu_feat(vcpu->kvm, KVM_S390_VM_CPU_FEAT_ESOP))
>   		scb_s->ecb |= scb_o->ecb & ECB_HOSTPROTINT;
> +	/*
> +	 * CPU Topology
> +	 * This facility only uses the utility field of the SCA and none of
> +	 * the cpu entries that are problematic with the other interpretation
> +	 * facilities so we can pass it through
> +	 */
> +	if (test_kvm_facility(vcpu->kvm, 11))
> +		scb_s->ecb |= scb_o->ecb & ECB_PTF;
>   	/* transactional execution */
>   	if (test_kvm_facility(vcpu->kvm, 73) && wants_tx) {
>   		/* remap the prefix is tx is toggled on */


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH v11 2/3] KVM: s390: guest support for topology function
  2022-07-01 16:25 ` [PATCH v11 2/3] KVM: s390: guest support for topology function Pierre Morel
  2022-07-04  8:46   ` Janosch Frank
@ 2022-07-04  9:08   ` Janis Schoetterl-Glausch
  2022-07-04  9:14     ` Janis Schoetterl-Glausch
  2022-07-04 11:02     ` Pierre Morel
  1 sibling, 2 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: Janis Schoetterl-Glausch @ 2022-07-04  9:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Pierre Morel, kvm
  Cc: linux-s390, linux-kernel, borntraeger, frankja, cohuck, david,
	thuth, imbrenda, hca, gor, wintera, seiden, nrb

On 7/1/22 18:25, Pierre Morel wrote:
> We report a topology change to the guest for any CPU hotplug.
> 
> The reporting to the guest is done using the Multiprocessor
> Topology-Change-Report (MTCR) bit of the utility entry in the guest's
> SCA which will be cleared during the interpretation of PTF.
> 
> On every vCPU creation we set the MCTR bit to let the guest know the
> next time he uses the PTF with command 2 instruction that the> topology changed and that he should use the STSI(15.1.x) instruction
s/he/it (twice)
> to get the topology details.
> 
> 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.And the user STSI capability.
Also: supportS.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Pierre Morel <pmorel@linux.ibm.com>
> Reviewed-by: Nico Boehr <nrb@linux.ibm.com>
> ---
>  arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h | 18 +++++++++++++---
>  arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c         | 36 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  arch/s390/kvm/priv.c             | 16 ++++++++++----
>  arch/s390/kvm/vsie.c             |  8 +++++++
>  4 files changed, 71 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h b/arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> index 766028d54a3e..ae6bd3d607de 100644
> --- a/arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> +++ b/arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> @@ -93,19 +93,30 @@ union ipte_control {
>  	};
>  };
>  
[...]

> diff --git a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
> index 8fcb56141689..ee59b03f2e45 100644
> --- a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
> +++ b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
> @@ -1691,6 +1691,31 @@ static int kvm_s390_get_cpu_model(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_device_attr *attr)
>  	return ret;
>  }
>  
> +/**
> + * kvm_s390_update_topology_change_report - update CPU topology change report
> + * @kvm: guest KVM description
> + * @val: set or clear the MTCR bit
> + *
> + * Updates the Multiprocessor Topology-Change-Report bit to signal
> + * the guest with a topology change.
> + * This is only relevant if the topology facility is present.
> + *
> + * The SCA version, bsca or esca, doesn't matter as offset is the same.
> + */
> +static void kvm_s390_update_topology_change_report(struct kvm *kvm, bool val)
> +{
> +	struct bsca_block *sca = kvm->arch.sca;
> +	union sca_utility new, old;
> +
> +	read_lock(&kvm->arch.sca_lock);

You forgot to put the assignment of sca under the lock.

> +	do {
> +		old = READ_ONCE(sca->utility);
> +		new = old;
> +		new.mtcr = val;
> +	} while (cmpxchg(&sca->utility.val, old.val, new.val) != old.val);
> +	read_unlock(&kvm->arch.sca_lock);
> +}
> +
>  static int kvm_s390_vm_set_attr(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_device_attr *attr)
>  {
>  	int ret;
> @@ -2877,6 +2902,7 @@ void kvm_arch_vcpu_destroy(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>  	kvm_clear_async_pf_completion_queue(vcpu);
>  	if (!kvm_is_ucontrol(vcpu->kvm))
>  		sca_del_vcpu(vcpu);
> +	kvm_s390_update_topology_change_report(vcpu->kvm, 1);
>  
>  	if (kvm_is_ucontrol(vcpu->kvm))
>  		gmap_remove(vcpu->arch.gmap);
> @@ -3272,6 +3298,14 @@ static int kvm_s390_vcpu_setup(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>  		vcpu->arch.sie_block->ecb |= ECB_HOSTPROTINT;
>  	if (test_kvm_facility(vcpu->kvm, 9))
>  		vcpu->arch.sie_block->ecb |= ECB_SRSI;
> +	/*
> +	 * CPU Topology
> +	 * This facility only uses the utility field of the SCA and none
> +	 * of the cpu entries that are problematic with the other
> +	 * interpretation facilities so we can pass it through.
> +	 */

This is the comment for vsie.c
> +	if (test_kvm_facility(vcpu->kvm, 11))
> +		vcpu->arch.sie_block->ecb |= ECB_PTF;
>  	if (test_kvm_facility(vcpu->kvm, 73))
>  		vcpu->arch.sie_block->ecb |= ECB_TE;
>  	if (!kvm_is_ucontrol(vcpu->kvm))
> @@ -3403,6 +3437,8 @@ int kvm_arch_vcpu_create(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>  	rc = kvm_s390_vcpu_setup(vcpu);
>  	if (rc)
>  		goto out_ucontrol_uninit;
> +
> +	kvm_s390_update_topology_change_report(vcpu->kvm, 1);
>  	return 0;
>  
>  out_ucontrol_uninit:
> diff --git a/arch/s390/kvm/priv.c b/arch/s390/kvm/priv.c
> index 12c464c7cddf..046afee1be94 100644
> --- a/arch/s390/kvm/priv.c
> +++ b/arch/s390/kvm/priv.c
> @@ -873,10 +873,13 @@ 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) {
> -		kvm_s390_set_psw_cc(vcpu, 3);
> -		return 0;
> -	}
> +	/* Bailout forbidden function codes */
> +	if (fc > 3 && (fc != 15 || kvm_s390_pv_cpu_is_protected(vcpu)))
> +		goto out_no_data;
> +
> +	/* fc 15 is provided with PTF/CPU topology support */
> +	if (fc == 15 && !test_kvm_facility(vcpu->kvm, 11))
> +		goto out_no_data;
>  
>  	if (vcpu->run->s.regs.gprs[0] & 0x0fffff00
>  	    || vcpu->run->s.regs.gprs[1] & 0xffff0000)
> @@ -910,6 +913,11 @@ static int handle_stsi(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>  			goto out_no_data;
>  		handle_stsi_3_2_2(vcpu, (void *) mem);
>  		break;
> +	case 15: /* fc 15 is fully handled in userspace */
> +		if (vcpu->kvm->arch.user_stsi)
> +			insert_stsi_usr_data(vcpu, operand2, ar, fc, sel1, sel2);
> +		trace_kvm_s390_handle_stsi(vcpu, fc, sel1, sel2, operand2);
> +		return -EREMOTE;

This doesn't look right to me, you still return -EREMOTE if user_stsi is false.
The way I read the PoP here is that it is ok to set condition code 3 for the else case

>  	}
>  	if (kvm_s390_pv_cpu_is_protected(vcpu)) {
>  		memcpy((void *)sida_origin(vcpu->arch.sie_block), (void *)mem,
> diff --git a/arch/s390/kvm/vsie.c b/arch/s390/kvm/vsie.c
> index dada78b92691..94138f8f0c1c 100644
> --- a/arch/s390/kvm/vsie.c
> +++ b/arch/s390/kvm/vsie.c
> @@ -503,6 +503,14 @@ static int shadow_scb(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct vsie_page *vsie_page)
>  	/* Host-protection-interruption introduced with ESOP */
>  	if (test_kvm_cpu_feat(vcpu->kvm, KVM_S390_VM_CPU_FEAT_ESOP))
>  		scb_s->ecb |= scb_o->ecb & ECB_HOSTPROTINT;
> +	/*
> +	 * CPU Topology
> +	 * This facility only uses the utility field of the SCA and none of
> +	 * the cpu entries that are problematic with the other interpretation
> +	 * facilities so we can pass it through
> +	 */
> +	if (test_kvm_facility(vcpu->kvm, 11))
> +		scb_s->ecb |= scb_o->ecb & ECB_PTF;
>  	/* transactional execution */
>  	if (test_kvm_facility(vcpu->kvm, 73) && wants_tx) {
>  		/* remap the prefix is tx is toggled on */


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH v11 2/3] KVM: s390: guest support for topology function
  2022-07-04  9:08   ` Janis Schoetterl-Glausch
@ 2022-07-04  9:14     ` Janis Schoetterl-Glausch
  2022-07-04 11:02     ` Pierre Morel
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: Janis Schoetterl-Glausch @ 2022-07-04  9:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Pierre Morel, kvm
  Cc: linux-s390, linux-kernel, borntraeger, frankja, cohuck, david,
	thuth, imbrenda, hca, gor, wintera, seiden, nrb

On 7/4/22 11:08, Janis Schoetterl-Glausch wrote:
> On 7/1/22 18:25, Pierre Morel wrote:
>> We report a topology change to the guest for any CPU hotplug.
>>
>> The reporting to the guest is done using the Multiprocessor
>> Topology-Change-Report (MTCR) bit of the utility entry in the guest's
>> SCA which will be cleared during the interpretation of PTF.
>>
>> On every vCPU creation we set the MCTR bit to let the guest know the
>> next time he uses the PTF with command 2 instruction that the> topology changed and that he should use the STSI(15.1.x) instruction
> s/he/it (twice)
>> to get the topology details.
>>
>> 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.

Oops, quoted my own comment, should have been:

And the user STSI capability.
Also: supportS.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH v11 3/3] KVM: s390: resetting the Topology-Change-Report
  2022-07-01 16:25 ` [PATCH v11 3/3] KVM: s390: resetting the Topology-Change-Report Pierre Morel
@ 2022-07-04  9:35   ` Janis Schoetterl-Glausch
  2022-07-04 13:56     ` Pierre Morel
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 15+ messages in thread
From: Janis Schoetterl-Glausch @ 2022-07-04  9:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Pierre Morel, kvm
  Cc: linux-s390, linux-kernel, borntraeger, frankja, cohuck, david,
	thuth, imbrenda, hca, gor, wintera, seiden, nrb

On 7/1/22 18:25, Pierre Morel wrote:
> During a subsystem reset the Topology-Change-Report is cleared.
> 
> Let's give userland the possibility to clear the MTCR in the case
> of a subsystem reset.
> 
> To migrate the MTCR, we give userland the possibility to
> query the MTCR state.
> 
> We indicate KVM support for the CPU topology facility with a new
> KVM capability: KVM_CAP_S390_CPU_TOPOLOGY.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Pierre Morel <pmorel@linux.ibm.com>
> ---
>  Documentation/virt/kvm/api.rst   | 25 +++++++++++++++
>  arch/s390/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h | 10 ++++++
>  arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c         | 53 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  include/uapi/linux/kvm.h         |  1 +
>  4 files changed, 89 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/virt/kvm/api.rst b/Documentation/virt/kvm/api.rst
> index 11e00a46c610..5e086125d8ad 100644
> --- a/Documentation/virt/kvm/api.rst
> +++ b/Documentation/virt/kvm/api.rst
> @@ -7956,6 +7956,31 @@ should adjust CPUID leaf 0xA to reflect that the PMU is disabled.
>  When enabled, KVM will exit to userspace with KVM_EXIT_SYSTEM_EVENT of
>  type KVM_SYSTEM_EVENT_SUSPEND to process the guest suspend request.
>  
> +8.37 KVM_CAP_S390_CPU_TOPOLOGY
> +------------------------------
> +
> +:Capability: KVM_CAP_S390_CPU_TOPOLOGY
> +:Architectures: s390
> +:Type: vm
> +
> +This capability indicates that KVM will provide the S390 CPU Topology
> +facility which consist of the interpretation of the PTF instruction for
> +the function code 2 along with interception and forwarding of both the
> +PTF instruction with function codes 0 or 1 and the STSI(15,1,x)
> +instruction to the userland hypervisor.
The latter only if the user STSI capability is also enabled.
> +
> +The stfle facility 11, CPU Topology facility, should not be indicated
> +to the guest without this capability.
> +
> +When this capability is present, KVM provides a new attribute group
> +on vm fd, KVM_S390_VM_CPU_TOPOLOGY.
> +This new attribute allows to get, set or clear the Modified Change
> +Topology Report (MTCR) bit of the SCA through the kvm_device_attr
> +structure.
> +
> +When getting the Modified Change Topology Report value, the attr->addr
> +must point to a byte where the value will be stored.
> +
>  9. Known KVM API problems
>  =========================
>  
> diff --git a/arch/s390/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h b/arch/s390/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h
> index 7a6b14874d65..df5e8279ffd0 100644
> --- a/arch/s390/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h
> +++ b/arch/s390/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h
> @@ -74,6 +74,7 @@ struct kvm_s390_io_adapter_req {
>  #define KVM_S390_VM_CRYPTO		2
>  #define KVM_S390_VM_CPU_MODEL		3
>  #define KVM_S390_VM_MIGRATION		4
> +#define KVM_S390_VM_CPU_TOPOLOGY	5
>  
>  /* kvm attributes for mem_ctrl */
>  #define KVM_S390_VM_MEM_ENABLE_CMMA	0
> @@ -171,6 +172,15 @@ struct kvm_s390_vm_cpu_subfunc {
>  #define KVM_S390_VM_MIGRATION_START	1
>  #define KVM_S390_VM_MIGRATION_STATUS	2
>  
> +/* kvm attributes for cpu topology */
> +#define KVM_S390_VM_CPU_TOPO_MTCR_CLEAR	0
> +#define KVM_S390_VM_CPU_TOPO_MTCR_SET	1
> +
> +struct kvm_cpu_topology {
> +	__u16 mtcr : 1;
> +	__u16 reserved : 15;
> +};

This is no longer used, is it?
> +
>  /* for KVM_GET_REGS and KVM_SET_REGS */
>  struct kvm_regs {
>  	/* general purpose regs for s390 */
> diff --git a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
> index ee59b03f2e45..5029fe40adbd 100644
> --- a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
> +++ b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
> @@ -606,6 +606,9 @@ int kvm_vm_ioctl_check_extension(struct kvm *kvm, long ext)
>  	case KVM_CAP_S390_PROTECTED:
>  		r = is_prot_virt_host();
>  		break;
> +	case KVM_CAP_S390_CPU_TOPOLOGY:
> +		r = test_facility(11);
> +		break;
>  	default:
>  		r = 0;
>  	}
> @@ -817,6 +820,20 @@ int kvm_vm_ioctl_enable_cap(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_enable_cap *cap)
>  		icpt_operexc_on_all_vcpus(kvm);
>  		r = 0;
>  		break;
> +	case KVM_CAP_S390_CPU_TOPOLOGY:
> +		r = -EINVAL;
> +		mutex_lock(&kvm->lock);
> +		if (kvm->created_vcpus) {
> +			r = -EBUSY;
> +		} else if (test_facility(11)) {
> +			set_kvm_facility(kvm->arch.model.fac_mask, 11);
> +			set_kvm_facility(kvm->arch.model.fac_list, 11);
> +			r = 0;
> +		}
> +		mutex_unlock(&kvm->lock);
> +		VM_EVENT(kvm, 3, "ENABLE: CPU TOPOLOGY %s",

I still would go for consistency here, "ENABLE: CAP_S390_CPU_TOPOLOGY %s".

> +			 r ? "(not available)" : "(success)");
> +		break;
>  	default:
>  		r = -EINVAL;
>  		break;
> @@ -1716,6 +1733,33 @@ static void kvm_s390_update_topology_change_report(struct kvm *kvm, bool val)
>  	read_unlock(&kvm->arch.sca_lock);
>  }
>  
> +static int kvm_s390_set_topology(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_device_attr *attr)
> +{
> +	if (!test_kvm_facility(kvm, 11))
> +		return -ENXIO;
> +
> +	kvm_s390_update_topology_change_report(kvm, !!attr->attr);

Will this not be automatically clamped to 0,1 if the argument has type bool?
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int kvm_s390_get_topology(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_device_attr *attr)
> +{
> +	union sca_utility utility;
> +	struct bsca_block *sca = kvm->arch.sca;
> +	__u8 topo;
> +
> +	if (!test_kvm_facility(kvm, 11))
> +		return -ENXIO;
> +
        read_lock(&kvm->arch.sca_lock);
        utility.val = READ_ONCE(kvm->arch.sca->utility.val);
        read_unlock(&kvm->arch.sca_lock);

And then get rid of the sca declaration.
> +	topo = utility.mtcr;
> +
> +	if (copy_to_user((void __user *)attr->addr, &topo, sizeof(topo)))
> +		return -EFAULT;
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
[...]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH v11 2/3] KVM: s390: guest support for topology function
  2022-07-04  9:08   ` Janis Schoetterl-Glausch
  2022-07-04  9:14     ` Janis Schoetterl-Glausch
@ 2022-07-04 11:02     ` Pierre Morel
  2022-07-04 11:17       ` Janosch Frank
  2022-07-04 13:54       ` Pierre Morel
  1 sibling, 2 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: Pierre Morel @ 2022-07-04 11:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Janis Schoetterl-Glausch, kvm
  Cc: linux-s390, linux-kernel, borntraeger, frankja, cohuck, david,
	thuth, imbrenda, hca, gor, wintera, seiden, nrb



On 7/4/22 11:08, Janis Schoetterl-Glausch wrote:
> On 7/1/22 18:25, Pierre Morel wrote:
>> We report a topology change to the guest for any CPU hotplug.
>>
>> The reporting to the guest is done using the Multiprocessor
>> Topology-Change-Report (MTCR) bit of the utility entry in the guest's
>> SCA which will be cleared during the interpretation of PTF.
>>
>> On every vCPU creation we set the MCTR bit to let the guest know the
>> next time he uses the PTF with command 2 instruction that the> topology changed and that he should use the STSI(15.1.x) instruction
> s/he/it (twice)
>> to get the topology details.
>>
>> 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.And the user STSI capability.
> Also: supportS.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Pierre Morel <pmorel@linux.ibm.com>
>> Reviewed-by: Nico Boehr <nrb@linux.ibm.com>
>> ---
>>   arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h | 18 +++++++++++++---
>>   arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c         | 36 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>   arch/s390/kvm/priv.c             | 16 ++++++++++----
>>   arch/s390/kvm/vsie.c             |  8 +++++++
>>   4 files changed, 71 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h b/arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h
>> index 766028d54a3e..ae6bd3d607de 100644
>> --- a/arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h
>> +++ b/arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h
>> @@ -93,19 +93,30 @@ union ipte_control {
>>   	};
>>   };
>>   
> [...]
> 
>> diff --git a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
>> index 8fcb56141689..ee59b03f2e45 100644
>> --- a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
>> +++ b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
>> @@ -1691,6 +1691,31 @@ static int kvm_s390_get_cpu_model(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_device_attr *attr)
>>   	return ret;
>>   }
>>   
>> +/**
>> + * kvm_s390_update_topology_change_report - update CPU topology change report
>> + * @kvm: guest KVM description
>> + * @val: set or clear the MTCR bit
>> + *
>> + * Updates the Multiprocessor Topology-Change-Report bit to signal
>> + * the guest with a topology change.
>> + * This is only relevant if the topology facility is present.
>> + *
>> + * The SCA version, bsca or esca, doesn't matter as offset is the same.
>> + */
>> +static void kvm_s390_update_topology_change_report(struct kvm *kvm, bool val)
>> +{
>> +	struct bsca_block *sca = kvm->arch.sca;
>> +	union sca_utility new, old;
>> +
>> +	read_lock(&kvm->arch.sca_lock);
> 
> You forgot to put the assignment of sca under the lock.

Should I really?
What we want to protect here is the content of the sca.
The sca itself does not change during the life of the KVM AFAIK.

> 
>> +	do {
>> +		old = READ_ONCE(sca->utility);
>> +		new = old;
>> +		new.mtcr = val;
>> +	} while (cmpxchg(&sca->utility.val, old.val, new.val) != old.val);
>> +	read_unlock(&kvm->arch.sca_lock);
>> +}
>> +
>>   static int kvm_s390_vm_set_attr(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_device_attr *attr)
>>   {
>>   	int ret;
>> @@ -2877,6 +2902,7 @@ void kvm_arch_vcpu_destroy(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>>   	kvm_clear_async_pf_completion_queue(vcpu);
>>   	if (!kvm_is_ucontrol(vcpu->kvm))
>>   		sca_del_vcpu(vcpu);
>> +	kvm_s390_update_topology_change_report(vcpu->kvm, 1);
>>   
>>   	if (kvm_is_ucontrol(vcpu->kvm))
>>   		gmap_remove(vcpu->arch.gmap);
>> @@ -3272,6 +3298,14 @@ static int kvm_s390_vcpu_setup(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>>   		vcpu->arch.sie_block->ecb |= ECB_HOSTPROTINT;
>>   	if (test_kvm_facility(vcpu->kvm, 9))
>>   		vcpu->arch.sie_block->ecb |= ECB_SRSI;
>> +	/*
>> +	 * CPU Topology
>> +	 * This facility only uses the utility field of the SCA and none
>> +	 * of the cpu entries that are problematic with the other
>> +	 * interpretation facilities so we can pass it through.
>> +	 */
> 
> This is the comment for vsie.c

right

>> +	if (test_kvm_facility(vcpu->kvm, 11))
>> +		vcpu->arch.sie_block->ecb |= ECB_PTF;
>>   	if (test_kvm_facility(vcpu->kvm, 73))
>>   		vcpu->arch.sie_block->ecb |= ECB_TE;
>>   	if (!kvm_is_ucontrol(vcpu->kvm))
>> @@ -3403,6 +3437,8 @@ int kvm_arch_vcpu_create(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>>   	rc = kvm_s390_vcpu_setup(vcpu);
>>   	if (rc)
>>   		goto out_ucontrol_uninit;
>> +
>> +	kvm_s390_update_topology_change_report(vcpu->kvm, 1);
>>   	return 0;
>>   
>>   out_ucontrol_uninit:
>> diff --git a/arch/s390/kvm/priv.c b/arch/s390/kvm/priv.c
>> index 12c464c7cddf..046afee1be94 100644
>> --- a/arch/s390/kvm/priv.c
>> +++ b/arch/s390/kvm/priv.c
>> @@ -873,10 +873,13 @@ 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) {
>> -		kvm_s390_set_psw_cc(vcpu, 3);
>> -		return 0;
>> -	}
>> +	/* Bailout forbidden function codes */
>> +	if (fc > 3 && (fc != 15 || kvm_s390_pv_cpu_is_protected(vcpu)))
>> +		goto out_no_data;
>> +
>> +	/* fc 15 is provided with PTF/CPU topology support */
>> +	if (fc == 15 && !test_kvm_facility(vcpu->kvm, 11))
>> +		goto out_no_data;
>>   
>>   	if (vcpu->run->s.regs.gprs[0] & 0x0fffff00
>>   	    || vcpu->run->s.regs.gprs[1] & 0xffff0000)
>> @@ -910,6 +913,11 @@ static int handle_stsi(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>>   			goto out_no_data;
>>   		handle_stsi_3_2_2(vcpu, (void *) mem);
>>   		break;
>> +	case 15: /* fc 15 is fully handled in userspace */
>> +		if (vcpu->kvm->arch.user_stsi)
>> +			insert_stsi_usr_data(vcpu, operand2, ar, fc, sel1, sel2);
>> +		trace_kvm_s390_handle_stsi(vcpu, fc, sel1, sel2, operand2);
>> +		return -EREMOTE;
> 
> This doesn't look right to me, you still return -EREMOTE if user_stsi is false.
> The way I read the PoP here is that it is ok to set condition code 3 for the else case

Yes it is what I wanted to do.
I do not understand what I did here is stupid.


-- 
Pierre Morel
IBM Lab Boeblingen

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH v11 2/3] KVM: s390: guest support for topology function
  2022-07-04 11:02     ` Pierre Morel
@ 2022-07-04 11:17       ` Janosch Frank
  2022-07-04 13:51         ` Pierre Morel
  2022-07-04 13:54       ` Pierre Morel
  1 sibling, 1 reply; 15+ messages in thread
From: Janosch Frank @ 2022-07-04 11:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Pierre Morel, Janis Schoetterl-Glausch, kvm
  Cc: linux-s390, linux-kernel, borntraeger, cohuck, david, thuth,
	imbrenda, hca, gor, wintera, seiden, nrb

On 7/4/22 13:02, Pierre Morel wrote:
> 
> 
> On 7/4/22 11:08, Janis Schoetterl-Glausch wrote:
>> On 7/1/22 18:25, Pierre Morel wrote:
>>> We report a topology change to the guest for any CPU hotplug.
>>>
>>> The reporting to the guest is done using the Multiprocessor
>>> Topology-Change-Report (MTCR) bit of the utility entry in the guest's
>>> SCA which will be cleared during the interpretation of PTF.
>>>
>>> On every vCPU creation we set the MCTR bit to let the guest know the
>>> next time he uses the PTF with command 2 instruction that the> topology changed and that he should use the STSI(15.1.x) instruction
>> s/he/it (twice)
>>> to get the topology details.
>>>
>>> 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.And the user STSI capability.
>> Also: supportS.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Pierre Morel <pmorel@linux.ibm.com>
>>> Reviewed-by: Nico Boehr <nrb@linux.ibm.com>
>>> ---
>>>    arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h | 18 +++++++++++++---
>>>    arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c         | 36 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>    arch/s390/kvm/priv.c             | 16 ++++++++++----
>>>    arch/s390/kvm/vsie.c             |  8 +++++++
>>>    4 files changed, 71 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h b/arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h
>>> index 766028d54a3e..ae6bd3d607de 100644
>>> --- a/arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h
>>> +++ b/arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h
>>> @@ -93,19 +93,30 @@ union ipte_control {
>>>    	};
>>>    };
>>>    
>> [...]
>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
>>> index 8fcb56141689..ee59b03f2e45 100644
>>> --- a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
>>> +++ b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
>>> @@ -1691,6 +1691,31 @@ static int kvm_s390_get_cpu_model(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_device_attr *attr)
>>>    	return ret;
>>>    }
>>>    
>>> +/**
>>> + * kvm_s390_update_topology_change_report - update CPU topology change report
>>> + * @kvm: guest KVM description
>>> + * @val: set or clear the MTCR bit
>>> + *
>>> + * Updates the Multiprocessor Topology-Change-Report bit to signal
>>> + * the guest with a topology change.
>>> + * This is only relevant if the topology facility is present.
>>> + *
>>> + * The SCA version, bsca or esca, doesn't matter as offset is the same.
>>> + */
>>> +static void kvm_s390_update_topology_change_report(struct kvm *kvm, bool val)
>>> +{
>>> +	struct bsca_block *sca = kvm->arch.sca;
>>> +	union sca_utility new, old;
>>> +
>>> +	read_lock(&kvm->arch.sca_lock);
>>
>> You forgot to put the assignment of sca under the lock.
> 
> Should I really?
> What we want to protect here is the content of the sca.
> The sca itself does not change during the life of the KVM AFAIK.

The SCA origin as well as the SCA contents can change within the 
lifetime of a KVM VM.

When we switch from bsca to esca we'll use new pages.
When we add/remove cpus we'll update the MCN and the CPU entry.



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH v11 2/3] KVM: s390: guest support for topology function
  2022-07-04 11:17       ` Janosch Frank
@ 2022-07-04 13:51         ` Pierre Morel
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: Pierre Morel @ 2022-07-04 13:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Janosch Frank, Janis Schoetterl-Glausch, kvm
  Cc: linux-s390, linux-kernel, borntraeger, cohuck, david, thuth,
	imbrenda, hca, gor, wintera, seiden, nrb



On 7/4/22 13:17, Janosch Frank wrote:
> On 7/4/22 13:02, Pierre Morel wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 7/4/22 11:08, Janis Schoetterl-Glausch wrote:
>>> On 7/1/22 18:25, Pierre Morel wrote:
>>>> We report a topology change to the guest for any CPU hotplug.
>>>>
>>>> The reporting to the guest is done using the Multiprocessor
>>>> Topology-Change-Report (MTCR) bit of the utility entry in the guest's
>>>> SCA which will be cleared during the interpretation of PTF.
>>>>
>>>> On every vCPU creation we set the MCTR bit to let the guest know the
>>>> next time he uses the PTF with command 2 instruction that the> 
>>>> topology changed and that he should use the STSI(15.1.x) instruction
>>> s/he/it (twice)
>>>> to get the topology details.
>>>>
>>>> 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.And the user STSI capability.
>>> Also: supportS.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Pierre Morel <pmorel@linux.ibm.com>
>>>> Reviewed-by: Nico Boehr <nrb@linux.ibm.com>
>>>> ---
>>>>    arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h | 18 +++++++++++++---
>>>>    arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c         | 36 
>>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>    arch/s390/kvm/priv.c             | 16 ++++++++++----
>>>>    arch/s390/kvm/vsie.c             |  8 +++++++
>>>>    4 files changed, 71 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h 
>>>> b/arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h
>>>> index 766028d54a3e..ae6bd3d607de 100644
>>>> --- a/arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h
>>>> +++ b/arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h
>>>> @@ -93,19 +93,30 @@ union ipte_control {
>>>>        };
>>>>    };
>>> [...]
>>>
>>>> diff --git a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
>>>> index 8fcb56141689..ee59b03f2e45 100644
>>>> --- a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
>>>> +++ b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
>>>> @@ -1691,6 +1691,31 @@ static int kvm_s390_get_cpu_model(struct kvm 
>>>> *kvm, struct kvm_device_attr *attr)
>>>>        return ret;
>>>>    }
>>>> +/**
>>>> + * kvm_s390_update_topology_change_report - update CPU topology 
>>>> change report
>>>> + * @kvm: guest KVM description
>>>> + * @val: set or clear the MTCR bit
>>>> + *
>>>> + * Updates the Multiprocessor Topology-Change-Report bit to signal
>>>> + * the guest with a topology change.
>>>> + * This is only relevant if the topology facility is present.
>>>> + *
>>>> + * The SCA version, bsca or esca, doesn't matter as offset is the 
>>>> same.
>>>> + */
>>>> +static void kvm_s390_update_topology_change_report(struct kvm *kvm, 
>>>> bool val)
>>>> +{
>>>> +    struct bsca_block *sca = kvm->arch.sca;
>>>> +    union sca_utility new, old;
>>>> +
>>>> +    read_lock(&kvm->arch.sca_lock);
>>>
>>> You forgot to put the assignment of sca under the lock.
>>
>> Should I really?
>> What we want to protect here is the content of the sca.
>> The sca itself does not change during the life of the KVM AFAIK.
> 
> The SCA origin as well as the SCA contents can change within the 
> lifetime of a KVM VM.
> 
> When we switch from bsca to esca we'll use new pages.
> When we add/remove cpus we'll update the MCN and the CPU entry.
> 
> 

Oh! then Yes, right.
thanks


-- 
Pierre Morel
IBM Lab Boeblingen

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH v11 2/3] KVM: s390: guest support for topology function
  2022-07-04 11:02     ` Pierre Morel
  2022-07-04 11:17       ` Janosch Frank
@ 2022-07-04 13:54       ` Pierre Morel
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: Pierre Morel @ 2022-07-04 13:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Janis Schoetterl-Glausch, kvm
  Cc: linux-s390, linux-kernel, borntraeger, frankja, cohuck, david,
	thuth, imbrenda, hca, gor, wintera, seiden, nrb



On 7/4/22 13:02, Pierre Morel wrote:
> 
> 
> On 7/4/22 11:08, Janis Schoetterl-Glausch wrote:
>> On 7/1/22 18:25, Pierre Morel wrote:

...

>>> +    if (test_kvm_facility(vcpu->kvm, 11))
>>> +        vcpu->arch.sie_block->ecb |= ECB_PTF;
>>>       if (test_kvm_facility(vcpu->kvm, 73))
>>>           vcpu->arch.sie_block->ecb |= ECB_TE;
>>>       if (!kvm_is_ucontrol(vcpu->kvm))
>>> @@ -3403,6 +3437,8 @@ int kvm_arch_vcpu_create(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>>>       rc = kvm_s390_vcpu_setup(vcpu);
>>>       if (rc)
>>>           goto out_ucontrol_uninit;
>>> +
>>> +    kvm_s390_update_topology_change_report(vcpu->kvm, 1);
>>>       return 0;
>>>   out_ucontrol_uninit:
>>> diff --git a/arch/s390/kvm/priv.c b/arch/s390/kvm/priv.c
>>> index 12c464c7cddf..046afee1be94 100644
>>> --- a/arch/s390/kvm/priv.c
>>> +++ b/arch/s390/kvm/priv.c
>>> @@ -873,10 +873,13 @@ 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) {
>>> -        kvm_s390_set_psw_cc(vcpu, 3);
>>> -        return 0;
>>> -    }
>>> +    /* Bailout forbidden function codes */
>>> +    if (fc > 3 && (fc != 15 || kvm_s390_pv_cpu_is_protected(vcpu)))
>>> +        goto out_no_data;
>>> +
>>> +    /* fc 15 is provided with PTF/CPU topology support */
>>> +    if (fc == 15 && !test_kvm_facility(vcpu->kvm, 11))
>>> +        goto out_no_data;
>>>       if (vcpu->run->s.regs.gprs[0] & 0x0fffff00
>>>           || vcpu->run->s.regs.gprs[1] & 0xffff0000)
>>> @@ -910,6 +913,11 @@ static int handle_stsi(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>>>               goto out_no_data;
>>>           handle_stsi_3_2_2(vcpu, (void *) mem);
>>>           break;
>>> +    case 15: /* fc 15 is fully handled in userspace */
>>> +        if (vcpu->kvm->arch.user_stsi)
>>> +            insert_stsi_usr_data(vcpu, operand2, ar, fc, sel1, sel2);
>>> +        trace_kvm_s390_handle_stsi(vcpu, fc, sel1, sel2, operand2);
>>> +        return -EREMOTE;
>>
>> This doesn't look right to me, you still return -EREMOTE if user_stsi 
>> is false.
>> The way I read the PoP here is that it is ok to set condition code 3 
>> for the else case
> 
> Yes it is what I wanted to do.
> I do not understand what I did here is stupid.

I thought again on this as I explain in another thread, I do not think 
we need to check on user_stsi here.


> 
> 

-- 
Pierre Morel
IBM Lab Boeblingen

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH v11 3/3] KVM: s390: resetting the Topology-Change-Report
  2022-07-04  9:35   ` Janis Schoetterl-Glausch
@ 2022-07-04 13:56     ` Pierre Morel
  2022-07-05  8:09       ` Janis Schoetterl-Glausch
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 15+ messages in thread
From: Pierre Morel @ 2022-07-04 13:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Janis Schoetterl-Glausch, kvm
  Cc: linux-s390, linux-kernel, borntraeger, frankja, cohuck, david,
	thuth, imbrenda, hca, gor, wintera, seiden, nrb



On 7/4/22 11:35, Janis Schoetterl-Glausch wrote:
> On 7/1/22 18:25, Pierre Morel wrote:
>> During a subsystem reset the Topology-Change-Report is cleared.
>>
>> Let's give userland the possibility to clear the MTCR in the case
>> of a subsystem reset.
>>
>> To migrate the MTCR, we give userland the possibility to
>> query the MTCR state.
>>
>> We indicate KVM support for the CPU topology facility with a new
>> KVM capability: KVM_CAP_S390_CPU_TOPOLOGY.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Pierre Morel <pmorel@linux.ibm.com>
>> ---
>>   Documentation/virt/kvm/api.rst   | 25 +++++++++++++++
>>   arch/s390/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h | 10 ++++++
>>   arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c         | 53 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>   include/uapi/linux/kvm.h         |  1 +
>>   4 files changed, 89 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/virt/kvm/api.rst b/Documentation/virt/kvm/api.rst
>> index 11e00a46c610..5e086125d8ad 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/virt/kvm/api.rst
>> +++ b/Documentation/virt/kvm/api.rst
>> @@ -7956,6 +7956,31 @@ should adjust CPUID leaf 0xA to reflect that the PMU is disabled.
>>   When enabled, KVM will exit to userspace with KVM_EXIT_SYSTEM_EVENT of
>>   type KVM_SYSTEM_EVENT_SUSPEND to process the guest suspend request.
>>   
>> +8.37 KVM_CAP_S390_CPU_TOPOLOGY
>> +------------------------------
>> +
>> +:Capability: KVM_CAP_S390_CPU_TOPOLOGY
>> +:Architectures: s390
>> +:Type: vm
>> +
>> +This capability indicates that KVM will provide the S390 CPU Topology
>> +facility which consist of the interpretation of the PTF instruction for
>> +the function code 2 along with interception and forwarding of both the
>> +PTF instruction with function codes 0 or 1 and the STSI(15,1,x)
>> +instruction to the userland hypervisor.
> The latter only if the user STSI capability is also enabled.

Hum, not sure about this.
we can not set facility 11 and return 3 to STSI(15) for valid selectors.

I think that it was right before, KVM_CAP_S390_CPU_TOPOLOGY and 
KVM_CAP_S390_USER_STSI are independent in KVM, userland can turn on one 
and not the other.
But KVM proposes both.

Of course it is stupid to turn on only KVM_CAP_S390_CPU_TOPOLOGY but KVM 
is not responsible for this userland is.

Otherwise, we need to check on KVM_CAP_S390_USER_STSI before authorizing 
  KVM_CAP_S390_CPU_TOPOLOGY and that looks even more complicated for me,
or we suppress the KVM_CAP_S390_CPU_TOPOLOGY and implement the all 
stsi(15) in the kernel what I really do not think is good because of the 
complexity of the userland API

>> +
>> +The stfle facility 11, CPU Topology facility, should not be indicated
>> +to the guest without this capability.
>> +
>> +When this capability is present, KVM provides a new attribute group
>> +on vm fd, KVM_S390_VM_CPU_TOPOLOGY.
>> +This new attribute allows to get, set or clear the Modified Change
>> +Topology Report (MTCR) bit of the SCA through the kvm_device_attr
>> +structure.
>> +
>> +When getting the Modified Change Topology Report value, the attr->addr
>> +must point to a byte where the value will be stored.
>> +
>>   9. Known KVM API problems
>>   =========================
>>   
>> diff --git a/arch/s390/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h b/arch/s390/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h
>> index 7a6b14874d65..df5e8279ffd0 100644
>> --- a/arch/s390/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h
>> +++ b/arch/s390/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h
>> @@ -74,6 +74,7 @@ struct kvm_s390_io_adapter_req {
>>   #define KVM_S390_VM_CRYPTO		2
>>   #define KVM_S390_VM_CPU_MODEL		3
>>   #define KVM_S390_VM_MIGRATION		4
>> +#define KVM_S390_VM_CPU_TOPOLOGY	5
>>   
>>   /* kvm attributes for mem_ctrl */
>>   #define KVM_S390_VM_MEM_ENABLE_CMMA	0
>> @@ -171,6 +172,15 @@ struct kvm_s390_vm_cpu_subfunc {
>>   #define KVM_S390_VM_MIGRATION_START	1
>>   #define KVM_S390_VM_MIGRATION_STATUS	2
>>   
>> +/* kvm attributes for cpu topology */
>> +#define KVM_S390_VM_CPU_TOPO_MTCR_CLEAR	0
>> +#define KVM_S390_VM_CPU_TOPO_MTCR_SET	1
>> +
>> +struct kvm_cpu_topology {
>> +	__u16 mtcr : 1;
>> +	__u16 reserved : 15;
>> +};
> 
> This is no longer used, is it?

No, I sent the wrong patch it seems!! Sorry for that.
There is nothing more in kvm.h now but the definition for 
KVM_S390_VM_CPU_TOPOLOGY




>> +
>>   /* for KVM_GET_REGS and KVM_SET_REGS */
>>   struct kvm_regs {
>>   	/* general purpose regs for s390 */
>> diff --git a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
>> index ee59b03f2e45..5029fe40adbd 100644
>> --- a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
>> +++ b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
>> @@ -606,6 +606,9 @@ int kvm_vm_ioctl_check_extension(struct kvm *kvm, long ext)
>>   	case KVM_CAP_S390_PROTECTED:
>>   		r = is_prot_virt_host();
>>   		break;
>> +	case KVM_CAP_S390_CPU_TOPOLOGY:
>> +		r = test_facility(11);
>> +		break;
>>   	default:
>>   		r = 0;
>>   	}
>> @@ -817,6 +820,20 @@ int kvm_vm_ioctl_enable_cap(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_enable_cap *cap)
>>   		icpt_operexc_on_all_vcpus(kvm);
>>   		r = 0;
>>   		break;
>> +	case KVM_CAP_S390_CPU_TOPOLOGY:
>> +		r = -EINVAL;
>> +		mutex_lock(&kvm->lock);
>> +		if (kvm->created_vcpus) {
>> +			r = -EBUSY;
>> +		} else if (test_facility(11)) {
>> +			set_kvm_facility(kvm->arch.model.fac_mask, 11);
>> +			set_kvm_facility(kvm->arch.model.fac_list, 11);
>> +			r = 0;
>> +		}
>> +		mutex_unlock(&kvm->lock);
>> +		VM_EVENT(kvm, 3, "ENABLE: CPU TOPOLOGY %s",
> 
> I still would go for consistency here, "ENABLE: CAP_S390_CPU_TOPOLOGY %s".

Yes, done.

> 
>> +			 r ? "(not available)" : "(success)");
>> +		break;
>>   	default:
>>   		r = -EINVAL;
>>   		break;
>> @@ -1716,6 +1733,33 @@ static void kvm_s390_update_topology_change_report(struct kvm *kvm, bool val)
>>   	read_unlock(&kvm->arch.sca_lock);
>>   }
>>   
>> +static int kvm_s390_set_topology(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_device_attr *attr)
>> +{
>> +	if (!test_kvm_facility(kvm, 11))
>> +		return -ENXIO;
>> +
>> +	kvm_s390_update_topology_change_report(kvm, !!attr->attr);
> 
> Will this not be automatically clamped to 0,1 if the argument has type bool?

I do not know, anyway done like this is sure.

>> +	return 0;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static int kvm_s390_get_topology(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_device_attr *attr)
>> +{
>> +	union sca_utility utility;
>> +	struct bsca_block *sca = kvm->arch.sca;
>> +	__u8 topo;
>> +
>> +	if (!test_kvm_facility(kvm, 11))
>> +		return -ENXIO;
>> +
>          read_lock(&kvm->arch.sca_lock);
>          utility.val = READ_ONCE(kvm->arch.sca->utility.val);
>          read_unlock(&kvm->arch.sca_lock); >
> And then get rid of the sca declaration.


OK

>> +	topo = utility.mtcr;
>> +
>> +	if (copy_to_user((void __user *)attr->addr, &topo, sizeof(topo)))
>> +		return -EFAULT;
>> +
>> +	return 0;
>> +}
>> +
> [...]
> 

-- 
Pierre Morel
IBM Lab Boeblingen

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH v11 3/3] KVM: s390: resetting the Topology-Change-Report
  2022-07-04 13:56     ` Pierre Morel
@ 2022-07-05  8:09       ` Janis Schoetterl-Glausch
  2022-07-05 12:38         ` Pierre Morel
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 15+ messages in thread
From: Janis Schoetterl-Glausch @ 2022-07-05  8:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Pierre Morel, kvm
  Cc: linux-s390, linux-kernel, borntraeger, frankja, cohuck, david,
	thuth, imbrenda, hca, gor, wintera, seiden, nrb

On 7/4/22 15:56, Pierre Morel wrote:
> 
> 
> On 7/4/22 11:35, Janis Schoetterl-Glausch wrote:
>> On 7/1/22 18:25, Pierre Morel wrote:
>>> During a subsystem reset the Topology-Change-Report is cleared.
>>>
>>> Let's give userland the possibility to clear the MTCR in the case
>>> of a subsystem reset.
>>>
>>> To migrate the MTCR, we give userland the possibility to
>>> query the MTCR state.
>>>
>>> We indicate KVM support for the CPU topology facility with a new
>>> KVM capability: KVM_CAP_S390_CPU_TOPOLOGY.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Pierre Morel <pmorel@linux.ibm.com>
>>> ---
>>>   Documentation/virt/kvm/api.rst   | 25 +++++++++++++++
>>>   arch/s390/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h | 10 ++++++
>>>   arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c         | 53 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>   include/uapi/linux/kvm.h         |  1 +
>>>   4 files changed, 89 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/Documentation/virt/kvm/api.rst b/Documentation/virt/kvm/api.rst
>>> index 11e00a46c610..5e086125d8ad 100644
>>> --- a/Documentation/virt/kvm/api.rst
>>> +++ b/Documentation/virt/kvm/api.rst
>>> @@ -7956,6 +7956,31 @@ should adjust CPUID leaf 0xA to reflect that the PMU is disabled.
>>>   When enabled, KVM will exit to userspace with KVM_EXIT_SYSTEM_EVENT of
>>>   type KVM_SYSTEM_EVENT_SUSPEND to process the guest suspend request.
>>>   +8.37 KVM_CAP_S390_CPU_TOPOLOGY
>>> +------------------------------
>>> +
>>> +:Capability: KVM_CAP_S390_CPU_TOPOLOGY
>>> +:Architectures: s390
>>> +:Type: vm
>>> +
>>> +This capability indicates that KVM will provide the S390 CPU Topology
>>> +facility which consist of the interpretation of the PTF instruction for
>>> +the function code 2 along with interception and forwarding of both the
>>> +PTF instruction with function codes 0 or 1 and the STSI(15,1,x)
>>> +instruction to the userland hypervisor.
>> The latter only if the user STSI capability is also enabled.
> 
> Hum, not sure about this.
> we can not set facility 11 and return 3 to STSI(15) for valid selectors.

I think the PoP allows for this:

When the specified function-code, selector-1, and
selector-2 combination is invalid (is other than as
shown in Figure 10-84), or if it is valid but the
requested information is not available because the
specified level does not implement or does not fully
implement the instruction or because a necessary
part of the level is uninstalled or not initialized, and
provided that an exception is not recognized (see
“Special Conditions”), the condition code is set to 3.
When the function code is nonzero, the combination
is valid, the requested information is available, and
there is no exception, the requested information is
stored in a system-information block (SYSIB) at the
second-operand address.

So if user_stsi is off the information is not available because the level does not fully implement the instruction.
But I'm fine with KVM_CAP_S390_CPU_TOPOLOGY implying KVM_CAP_S390_USER_STSI, too.

> 
> I think that it was right before, KVM_CAP_S390_CPU_TOPOLOGY and KVM_CAP_S390_USER_STSI are independent in KVM, userland can turn on one and not the other.
> But KVM proposes both.
> 
> Of course it is stupid to turn on only KVM_CAP_S390_CPU_TOPOLOGY but KVM is not responsible for this userland is.
> 
> Otherwise, we need to check on KVM_CAP_S390_USER_STSI before authorizing  KVM_CAP_S390_CPU_TOPOLOGY and that looks even more complicated for me,
> or we suppress the KVM_CAP_S390_CPU_TOPOLOGY and implement the all stsi(15) in the kernel what I really do not think is good because of the complexity of the userland API

[...]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH v11 3/3] KVM: s390: resetting the Topology-Change-Report
  2022-07-05  8:09       ` Janis Schoetterl-Glausch
@ 2022-07-05 12:38         ` Pierre Morel
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: Pierre Morel @ 2022-07-05 12:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Janis Schoetterl-Glausch, kvm
  Cc: linux-s390, linux-kernel, borntraeger, frankja, cohuck, david,
	thuth, imbrenda, hca, gor, wintera, seiden, nrb



On 7/5/22 10:09, Janis Schoetterl-Glausch wrote:
> On 7/4/22 15:56, Pierre Morel wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 7/4/22 11:35, Janis Schoetterl-Glausch wrote:
>>> On 7/1/22 18:25, Pierre Morel wrote:
>>>> During a subsystem reset the Topology-Change-Report is cleared.
>>>>
>>>> Let's give userland the possibility to clear the MTCR in the case
>>>> of a subsystem reset.
>>>>
>>>> To migrate the MTCR, we give userland the possibility to
>>>> query the MTCR state.
>>>>
>>>> We indicate KVM support for the CPU topology facility with a new
>>>> KVM capability: KVM_CAP_S390_CPU_TOPOLOGY.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Pierre Morel <pmorel@linux.ibm.com>
>>>> ---
>>>>    Documentation/virt/kvm/api.rst   | 25 +++++++++++++++
>>>>    arch/s390/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h | 10 ++++++
>>>>    arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c         | 53 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>    include/uapi/linux/kvm.h         |  1 +
>>>>    4 files changed, 89 insertions(+)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/Documentation/virt/kvm/api.rst b/Documentation/virt/kvm/api.rst
>>>> index 11e00a46c610..5e086125d8ad 100644
>>>> --- a/Documentation/virt/kvm/api.rst
>>>> +++ b/Documentation/virt/kvm/api.rst
>>>> @@ -7956,6 +7956,31 @@ should adjust CPUID leaf 0xA to reflect that the PMU is disabled.
>>>>    When enabled, KVM will exit to userspace with KVM_EXIT_SYSTEM_EVENT of
>>>>    type KVM_SYSTEM_EVENT_SUSPEND to process the guest suspend request.
>>>>    +8.37 KVM_CAP_S390_CPU_TOPOLOGY
>>>> +------------------------------
>>>> +
>>>> +:Capability: KVM_CAP_S390_CPU_TOPOLOGY
>>>> +:Architectures: s390
>>>> +:Type: vm
>>>> +
>>>> +This capability indicates that KVM will provide the S390 CPU Topology
>>>> +facility which consist of the interpretation of the PTF instruction for
>>>> +the function code 2 along with interception and forwarding of both the
>>>> +PTF instruction with function codes 0 or 1 and the STSI(15,1,x)
>>>> +instruction to the userland hypervisor.
>>> The latter only if the user STSI capability is also enabled.
>>
>> Hum, not sure about this.
>> we can not set facility 11 and return 3 to STSI(15) for valid selectors.
> 
> I think the PoP allows for this:
> 
> When the specified function-code, selector-1, and
> selector-2 combination is invalid (is other than as
> shown in Figure 10-84),

> or if it is valid but the
> requested information is not available because the
> specified level does not implement or does not fully
> implement the instruction or because a necessary
> part of the level is uninstalled or not initialized, and
> provided that an exception is not recognized (see
> “Special Conditions”), the condition code is set to 3.


> When the function code is nonzero, the combination
> is valid, the requested information is available, and
> there is no exception, the requested information is
> stored in a system-information block (SYSIB) at the
> second-operand address.
> 
> So if user_stsi is off the information is not available because the level does not fully implement the instruction.
> But I'm fine with KVM_CAP_S390_CPU_TOPOLOGY implying KVM_CAP_S390_USER_STSI, too.

OK, I do like you say, return CC3 if no user_stsi is available

Thanks,
Pierre

> 
>>
>> I think that it was right before, KVM_CAP_S390_CPU_TOPOLOGY and KVM_CAP_S390_USER_STSI are independent in KVM, userland can turn on one and not the other.
>> But KVM proposes both.
>>
>> Of course it is stupid to turn on only KVM_CAP_S390_CPU_TOPOLOGY but KVM is not responsible for this userland is.
>>
>> Otherwise, we need to check on KVM_CAP_S390_USER_STSI before authorizing  KVM_CAP_S390_CPU_TOPOLOGY and that looks even more complicated for me,
>> or we suppress the KVM_CAP_S390_CPU_TOPOLOGY and implement the all stsi(15) in the kernel what I really do not think is good because of the complexity of the userland API
> 
> [...]
> 

-- 
Pierre Morel
IBM Lab Boeblingen

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2022-07-05 13:07 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2022-07-01 16:25 [PATCH v11 0/3] s390x: KVM: CPU Topology Pierre Morel
2022-07-01 16:25 ` [PATCH v11 1/3] KVM: s390: Cleanup ipte lock access and SIIF facility checks Pierre Morel
2022-07-01 16:25 ` [PATCH v11 2/3] KVM: s390: guest support for topology function Pierre Morel
2022-07-04  8:46   ` Janosch Frank
2022-07-04  9:08   ` Janis Schoetterl-Glausch
2022-07-04  9:14     ` Janis Schoetterl-Glausch
2022-07-04 11:02     ` Pierre Morel
2022-07-04 11:17       ` Janosch Frank
2022-07-04 13:51         ` Pierre Morel
2022-07-04 13:54       ` Pierre Morel
2022-07-01 16:25 ` [PATCH v11 3/3] KVM: s390: resetting the Topology-Change-Report Pierre Morel
2022-07-04  9:35   ` Janis Schoetterl-Glausch
2022-07-04 13:56     ` Pierre Morel
2022-07-05  8:09       ` Janis Schoetterl-Glausch
2022-07-05 12:38         ` Pierre Morel

This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.