qemu-s390x
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [qemu-s390x] [RFC 00/19] KVM: s390/crypto/vfio: guest dedicated cryp


From: Tony Krowiak
Subject: Re: [qemu-s390x] [RFC 00/19] KVM: s390/crypto/vfio: guest dedicated crypto adapters
Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2017 10:23:25 -0500
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.2.0

On 11/14/2017 08:57 AM, Cornelia Huck wrote:
On Tue, 31 Oct 2017 15:39:09 -0400
Tony Krowiak <address@hidden> wrote:

On 10/13/2017 01:38 PM, Tony Krowiak wrote:
Ping
Tony Krowiak (19):
    KVM: s390: SIE considerations for AP Queue virtualization
    KVM: s390: refactor crypto initialization
    s390/zcrypt: new AP matrix bus
    s390/zcrypt: create an AP matrix device on the AP matrix bus
    s390/zcrypt: base implementation of AP matrix device driver
    s390/zcrypt: register matrix device with VFIO mediated device
      framework
    KVM: s390: introduce AP matrix configuration interface
    s390/zcrypt: support for assigning adapters to matrix mdev
    s390/zcrypt: validate adapter assignment
    s390/zcrypt: sysfs interfaces supporting AP domain assignment
    s390/zcrypt: validate domain assignment
    s390/zcrypt: sysfs support for control domain assignment
    s390/zcrypt: validate control domain assignment
    KVM: s390: Connect the AP mediated matrix device to KVM
    s390/zcrypt: introduce ioctl access to VFIO AP Matrix driver
    KVM: s390: interface to configure KVM guest's AP matrix
    KVM: s390: validate input to AP matrix config interface
    KVM: s390: New ioctl to configure KVM guest's AP matrix
    s390/facilities: enable AP facilities needed by guest
I think the approach is fine, and the code also looks fine for the most
part. Some comments:

- various patches can be squashed together to give a better
   understanding at a glance
Which patches would you squash?
- this needs documentation (as I already said)
My plan is to take the cover letter patch and incorporate that into documentation,
then replace the cover letter patch with a more concise summary.
- some of the driver/device modelling feels a bit awkward (commented in
   patches) -- I'm not sure that my proposal is better, but I think we
   should make sure the interdependencies are modeled correctly
I am responding to each patch review individually.
- some minor stuff





reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]