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=-2.2 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_2 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 CD49FC742CF for ; Fri, 12 Jul 2019 15:49:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.linuxfoundation.org (mail.linuxfoundation.org [140.211.169.12]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A446320863 for ; Fri, 12 Jul 2019 15:49:46 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org A446320863 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.ibm.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=iommu-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org Received: from mail.linux-foundation.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 56BC75C7B; Fri, 12 Jul 2019 15:49:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D7DBF5C6E for ; Fri, 12 Jul 2019 15:43:00 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com [148.163.156.1]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B7E3D891 for ; Fri, 12 Jul 2019 15:42:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pps.filterd (m0098396.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id x6CFSjVI104394 for ; Fri, 12 Jul 2019 11:42:59 -0400 Received: from e06smtp07.uk.ibm.com (e06smtp07.uk.ibm.com [195.75.94.103]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2tpvp0157j-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Fri, 12 Jul 2019 11:42:58 -0400 Received: from localhost by e06smtp07.uk.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Fri, 12 Jul 2019 16:42:56 +0100 Received: from b06avi18878370.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (9.149.26.194) by e06smtp07.uk.ibm.com (192.168.101.137) with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted; (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256/256) Fri, 12 Jul 2019 16:42:52 +0100 Received: from d06av23.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06av23.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.105.59]) by b06avi18878370.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id x6CFgo9535914004 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 12 Jul 2019 15:42:50 GMT Received: from d06av23.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7FE1A4051; Fri, 12 Jul 2019 15:42:50 +0000 (GMT) Received: from d06av23.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D052A404D; Fri, 12 Jul 2019 15:42:50 +0000 (GMT) Received: from oc2783563651 (unknown [9.152.224.222]) by d06av23.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Fri, 12 Jul 2019 15:42:50 +0000 (GMT) Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2019 17:42:49 +0200 From: Halil Pasic To: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] fs/core/vmcore: Move sev_active() reference to x86 arch code In-Reply-To: <20190712151129.GA30636@lst.de> References: <20190712053631.9814-1-bauerman@linux.ibm.com> <20190712053631.9814-4-bauerman@linux.ibm.com> <20190712150912.3097215e.pasic@linux.ibm.com> <20190712140812.GA29628@lst.de> <20190712165153.78d49095.pasic@linux.ibm.com> <20190712151129.GA30636@lst.de> Organization: IBM X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.11.1 (GTK+ 2.24.31; x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 x-cbid: 19071215-0028-0000-0000-00000383C6D5 X-IBM-AV-DETECTION: SAVI=unused REMOTE=unused XFE=unused x-cbparentid: 19071215-0029-0000-0000-00002443DF5A Message-Id: <20190712174249.33b74535.pasic@linux.ibm.com> X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:, , definitions=2019-07-12_04:, , 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 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1810050000 definitions=main-1907120165 Cc: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, Mike Anderson , Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk , Robin Murphy , x86@kernel.org, Ram Pai , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org, Ingo Molnar , Borislav Petkov , "H. Peter Anvin" , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, Alexey Dobriyan X-BeenThere: iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Development issues for Linux IOMMU support List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: iommu-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org Errors-To: iommu-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org On Fri, 12 Jul 2019 17:11:29 +0200 Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Fri, Jul 12, 2019 at 04:51:53PM +0200, Halil Pasic wrote: > > Thank you very much! I will have another look, but it seems to me, > > without further measures taken, this would break protected virtualization > > support on s390. The effect of the che for s390 is that > > force_dma_unencrypted() will always return false instead calling into > > the platform code like it did before the patch, right? > > > > Should I send a Fixes: e67a5ed1f86f "dma-direct: Force unencrypted DMA > > under SME for certain DMA masks" (Tom Lendacky, 2019-07-10) patch that > > rectifies things for s390 or how do we want handle this? > > Yes, please do. I hadn't noticed the s390 support had landed in > mainline already. > Will do! I guess I should do the patch against the for-next branch of the dma-mapping tree. But that branch does not have the s390 support patches (yet?). To fix it I need both e67a5ed1f86f and 64e1f0c531d1 "s390/mm: force swiotlb for protected virtualization" (Halil Pasic, 2018-09-13). Or should I wait for e67a5ed1f86f landing in mainline? Regards, Halil _______________________________________________ iommu mailing list iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/iommu