On 03/26/2018 05:03 AM, Pierre Morel wrote:
On 26/03/2018 10:32, David Hildenbrand wrote:
On 16.03.2018 00:24, Tony Krowiak wrote:
+ /*
+ * The Query Configuration Information (QCI) function (fc == 4)
does not
+ * set a response code in reg 1, so check for that along with the
+ * AP feature.
+ */
+ if ((fc != 4) && s390_has_feat(S390_FEAT_AP)) {
+ env->regs[1] = 0x10000;
+
+ return 0;
+ }
This would imply an operation exception in case fc==4, which sounds very
wrong.
It depends but I think that the S390_FEAT_AP_QUERY_CONFIG_INFO must be
tested
to know what to answer.
If the feature is there, QCI must be answered correctly.
This is an interesting proposition which raises several issues that will
need to
be addressed. The only time the PQAP(QCI) instruction is intercepted is
when:
* A vfio-ap device is NOT defined for the guest because the vfio_ap
device driver
will set ECA.28 and the PQAP(QCI) instruction will be interpreted
* STFLE.12 is set for the guest
You say that the QCI must be answered correctly, but what is the correct
response?
If we return the matrix - i.e., APM, ADM and AQM - configured via the
mediated
matrix device's sysfs attributes files, then if any APQNs are defined in
the matrix,
we will have to handle *ALL* AP instructions by executing them on behalf
of the
guest. I suppose we could return an empty matrix in which case the AP
bus will come
up without any devices on the guest, but what is the expectation of an
admin who
deliberately configures the mediated matrix device? Should we forego
handling interception
of AP instructions and consider a guest configuration that turns on
S390_FEAT_AP but
does not define a vfio-ap device to be erroneous and terminate starting
of the guest?
Anybody have any thoughts?