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=-1.0 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham 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 94A4AC4321D for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2018 10:09:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 466F821480 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2018 10:09:50 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 466F821480 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728443AbeHVNeC (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Aug 2018 09:34:02 -0400 Received: from mx3-rdu2.redhat.com ([66.187.233.73]:43688 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726849AbeHVNeC (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Aug 2018 09:34:02 -0400 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx06.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.6]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 50B2F4023ECB; Wed, 22 Aug 2018 10:09:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from gondolin (dhcp-192-222.str.redhat.com [10.33.192.222]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB89A2157F49; Wed, 22 Aug 2018 10:09:41 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2018 12:09:39 +0200 From: Cornelia Huck To: Harald Freudenberger Cc: Tony Krowiak , linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, freude@de.ibm.com, schwidefsky@de.ibm.com, heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com, borntraeger@de.ibm.com, kwankhede@nvidia.com, bjsdjshi@linux.vnet.ibm.com, pbonzini@redhat.com, alex.williamson@redhat.com, pmorel@linux.vnet.ibm.com, alifm@linux.vnet.ibm.com, mjrosato@linux.vnet.ibm.com, jjherne@linux.vnet.ibm.com, thuth@redhat.com, pasic@linux.vnet.ibm.com, berrange@redhat.com, fiuczy@linux.vnet.ibm.com, buendgen@de.ibm.com, frankja@linux.ibm.com, Tony Krowiak Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 22/22] s390: doc: detailed specifications for AP virtualization Message-ID: <20180822120939.0e08e68b.cohuck@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <856de167-478f-f6e0-c706-1f9b87bed7f5@linux.ibm.com> References: <1534196899-16987-1-git-send-email-akrowiak@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1534196899-16987-23-git-send-email-akrowiak@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20180820180359.38cc4af3.cohuck@redhat.com> <6b83b4da-00eb-c690-e965-a4398dadd0e5@linux.ibm.com> <20180821175309.55b774ca.cohuck@redhat.com> <856de167-478f-f6e0-c706-1f9b87bed7f5@linux.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 2.78 on 10.11.54.6 X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.11.55.7]); Wed, 22 Aug 2018 10:09:47 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: inspected by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.11.55.7]); Wed, 22 Aug 2018 10:09:47 +0000 (UTC) for IP:'10.11.54.6' DOMAIN:'int-mx06.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com' HELO:'smtp.corp.redhat.com' FROM:'cohuck@redhat.com' RCPT:'' Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 22 Aug 2018 09:04:13 +0200 Harald Freudenberger wrote: > Well, sooner or later this has to work. Yesterday we tested the control > domain thing with trying to pull some simple data from a 'controlled' domain > to the TKE - doesn't work with a Linux LPAR. I will investigate the details in the > next weeks. However, long-term it should be possible to run scenarios > like having one KVM guest control all the domains used by other KVM guests. > With respect to the KVM vfio driver, currently there should be just the > rule that for a guest the control domain mask should be equal or a superset > of the usage domain mask. This is by convention as the architecture is > not so clear here, but this is enforced on every place which deals with > usage and control domains (SE, TKE). Thanks for the update; this makes me think we really should fiddle with the masks in the kernel (as opposed to doing it higher up in the stack).