From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.9 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB0FBC2D0B1 for ; Tue, 4 Feb 2020 09:49:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8EA9D21741 for ; Tue, 4 Feb 2020 09:49:51 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="DVMoPUS0" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726631AbgBDJtu (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Feb 2020 04:49:50 -0500 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com ([207.211.31.120]:31456 "EHLO us-smtp-1.mimecast.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726479AbgBDJtu (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Feb 2020 04:49:50 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1580809788; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=2QMMZyzmGnRuRqMTcQDYBBSptxEtc2oQ8xAtmgxtCpo=; b=DVMoPUS0HiZHipkhrMqWtEK6NixVlqH+1qWmnh1Eyf1ujINTV9IiQSBr2ih7pq+Wlz9pn4 1LVVsdwmc6iq7SOxbKKixpe1y20UH6VmXt4Ih3wGueyH04xmceN7WAa5gxhSxOj036106J 9Yn3hZscga+TBQm0yFk73xMvhhVav60= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-389-FMNY4un9Pbyvt7Fo5RKrwA-1; Tue, 04 Feb 2020 04:49:43 -0500 X-MC-Unique: FMNY4un9Pbyvt7Fo5RKrwA-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx08.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ED79E10CE780; Tue, 4 Feb 2020 09:49:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from gondolin (ovpn-117-199.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.117.199]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C718F196AE; Tue, 4 Feb 2020 09:49:37 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2020 10:49:35 +0100 From: Cornelia Huck To: Christian Borntraeger Cc: Janosch Frank , KVM , David Hildenbrand , Thomas Huth , Ulrich Weigand , Claudio Imbrenda , Andrea Arcangeli Subject: Re: [RFCv2 02/37] s390/protvirt: introduce host side setup Message-ID: <20200204104935.0c40b169.cohuck@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <37a54aaf-a297-1caf-478a-523acd6af6b1@de.ibm.com> References: <20200203131957.383915-1-borntraeger@de.ibm.com> <20200203131957.383915-3-borntraeger@de.ibm.com> <20200203181238.7c7ea03b.cohuck@redhat.com> <0310f99f-6d1e-b1bb-9313-be2a92c601ba@de.ibm.com> <20200204102820.51081649.cohuck@redhat.com> <37a54aaf-a297-1caf-478a-523acd6af6b1@de.ibm.com> Organization: Red Hat GmbH MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.84 on 10.5.11.23 Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: kvm@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 4 Feb 2020 10:38:55 +0100 Christian Borntraeger wrote: > On 04.02.20 10:28, Cornelia Huck wrote: > > On Mon, 3 Feb 2020 23:03:42 +0100 > > Christian Borntraeger wrote: > > > >> On 03.02.20 18:12, Cornelia Huck wrote: > >>> On Mon, 3 Feb 2020 08:19:22 -0500 > >>> Christian Borntraeger wrote: > >>> > >>>> From: Vasily Gorbik > >>>> > >>>> Introduce KVM_S390_PROTECTED_VIRTUALIZATION_HOST kbuild option for > >>>> protected virtual machines hosting support code. > >>> > >>> Hm... I seem to remember that you wanted to drop this config option and > >>> always build the code, in order to reduce complexity. Have you > >>> reconsidered this? > >> > >> I am still in favour of removing this, but I did not get an "yes, lets do > >> it" answer. Since removing is easier than re-adding its still in. > > > > ok > > Any preference from you? Not at the moment, I still need to look at the following patches. > > [...] > > > > I think I was confused about different things last time... > > > > But that is probably a sign that this wants a comment :) > > Will add > > to kernel/uv.c > /* the bootdata_preserved fields come from ones in arch/s390/boot/uv.c */ > > to boot/uv.c > /* will be used in arch/s390/kernel/uv.c */ Thanks! > > > [...] > > Fair enough; it's just that it's not very clear from the messages in > > the log what happened. Maybe > > > > "prot_virt: Running as protected virtualization guest." > > "prot_virt: The ultravisor call facility is not available." > > > > That at least links back to the kernel parameter. > > I will defer this until the end, in the hope to have a final name by then. > ok