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=-2.0 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 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 13DCFC432C0 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2019 10:54:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (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 D2E4920656 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2019 10:54:38 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="fCfXtlfQ" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org D2E4920656 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Received: from localhost ([::1]:51496 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ic5pF-0002IP-2P for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Tue, 03 Dec 2019 05:54:38 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:45486) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ic5kM-0000TZ-Bc for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 03 Dec 2019 05:49:36 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ic5kH-0008BL-E4 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 03 Dec 2019 05:49:30 -0500 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com ([205.139.110.120]:30576 helo=us-smtp-1.mimecast.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ic5kH-00086S-8i for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 03 Dec 2019 05:49:29 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1575370167; h=from:from:reply-to: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=VAUDkRtpv/DO3dWe+257rO/IOkjpO1FAZpSLrAc9cAU=; b=fCfXtlfQ7sv2+hAU3whpLimFs/Q8fALCQRGj3kj2hjhUrmJvX1I2UvcxXtf3ZsQ0C1gCyR p1L/jzBQFTEOX8SA5TSJ9BY1dHQfZxX0B7hGWalZyX2B28d1fxs0fo3TKYYwbYaOqdmSg1 VFEF+sw+E6Wzlo1uyYL2GsJQxt34Bi0= 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-198-vfKHZJ6VMHOpfuZ_33q3dg-1; Tue, 03 Dec 2019 05:49:23 -0500 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx05.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.15]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3B3C1800D4E; Tue, 3 Dec 2019 10:49:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from redhat.com (ovpn-112-52.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.112.52]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 145335D6A7; Tue, 3 Dec 2019 10:49:16 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2019 10:49:14 +0000 From: Daniel =?utf-8?B?UC4gQmVycmFuZ8Op?= To: Janosch Frank Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/15] s390x: Protected Virtualization support Message-ID: <20191203104914.GA267814@redhat.com> References: <20191120114334.2287-1-frankja@linux.ibm.com> <20191129110820.GF2260471@redhat.com> <699bb3bc-f42a-2fcf-acb3-b91d783e7ce4@linux.ibm.com> <20191129123524.GI2260471@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.12.1 (2019-06-15) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.15 X-MC-Unique: vfKHZJ6VMHOpfuZ_33q3dg-1 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] [fuzzy] X-Received-From: 205.139.110.120 X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: Daniel =?utf-8?B?UC4gQmVycmFuZ8Op?= Cc: thuth@redhat.com, Boris Fiuczynski , pmorel@linux.ibm.com, david@redhat.com, cohuck@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, borntraeger@de.ibm.com, qemu-s390x@nongnu.org, mihajlov@linux.ibm.com Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" On Fri, Nov 29, 2019 at 03:02:41PM +0100, Janosch Frank wrote: > On 11/29/19 1:35 PM, Daniel P. Berrang=C3=A9 wrote: > > Is there any way to prevent a guest from using protected mode even > > if QEMU supports it ? eg the mgmt app may want to be able to > > guarantee that all VMs are migratable, so don't want a guest OS > > secretly activating protected mode which blocks migration. >=20 > Not enabling facility 161 is enough. Is this facility enabled by default in any scenario ? What happens if the feature is enabled & QEMU is also coinfigured to use huge pages or does not have memory pinned into RAM, given that those features are said to be incompatible ? >=20 > >=20 > >> Such VMs are started like any other VM and run a short "normal" stub > >> that will prepare some things and then requests to be protected. > >> > >> Most of the restrictions are memory related and might be lifted in the > >> future: > >> * No paging > >> * No migration > >=20 > > Presumably QEMU is going to set a migration blocker when a guest > > activates protected mode ? >=20 > Well, that's stuff I still need to figure out :) >=20 > >=20 > >> * No huge page backings > >> * No collaborative memory management Regards, Daniel --=20 |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange= :| |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com= :| |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange= :|