Message ID | 20231212212522.307893-1-akrowiak@linux.ibm.com (mailing list archive) |
---|---|
Headers | show |
Series | s390/vfio-ap: reset queues removed from guest's AP configuration | expand |
PING! Happy New Year! On 12/12/23 4:25 PM, Tony Krowiak wrote: > All queues removed from a guest's AP configuration must be reset so when > they are subsequently made available again to a guest, they re-appear in a > reset state. There are some scenarios where this is not the case. For > example, if a queue device that is passed through to a guest is unbound > from the vfio_ap device driver, the adapter to which the queue is attached > will be removed from the guest's AP configuration. Doing so implicitly > removes all queues associated with that adapter because the AP architecture > precludes removing a single queue. Those queues also need to be reset. > > This patch series ensures that all queues removed from a guest's AP > configuration are reset for all possible scenarios. > > Changelog v1=> v2: > ----------------- > * Restored Halil's Acked-by and Reviewed-by tags (Halil) > > * Restored Halil's code refactor of reset_queues_for_apids function in > patch 4 > > Tony Krowiak (6): > s390/vfio-ap: always filter entire AP matrix > s390/vfio-ap: loop over the shadow APCB when filtering guest's AP > configuration > s390/vfio-ap: let 'on_scan_complete' callback filter matrix and update > guest's APCB > s390/vfio-ap: reset queues filtered from the guest's AP config > s390/vfio-ap: reset queues associated with adapter for queue unbound > from driver > s390/vfio-ap: do not reset queue removed from host config > > drivers/s390/crypto/vfio_ap_ops.c | 268 +++++++++++++++++--------- > drivers/s390/crypto/vfio_ap_private.h | 11 +- > 2 files changed, 184 insertions(+), 95 deletions(-) >
PING! On 12/12/23 4:25 PM, Tony Krowiak wrote: > All queues removed from a guest's AP configuration must be reset so when > they are subsequently made available again to a guest, they re-appear in a > reset state. There are some scenarios where this is not the case. For > example, if a queue device that is passed through to a guest is unbound > from the vfio_ap device driver, the adapter to which the queue is attached > will be removed from the guest's AP configuration. Doing so implicitly > removes all queues associated with that adapter because the AP architecture > precludes removing a single queue. Those queues also need to be reset. > > This patch series ensures that all queues removed from a guest's AP > configuration are reset for all possible scenarios. > > Changelog v1=> v2: > ----------------- > * Restored Halil's Acked-by and Reviewed-by tags (Halil) > > * Restored Halil's code refactor of reset_queues_for_apids function in > patch 4 > > Tony Krowiak (6): > s390/vfio-ap: always filter entire AP matrix > s390/vfio-ap: loop over the shadow APCB when filtering guest's AP > configuration > s390/vfio-ap: let 'on_scan_complete' callback filter matrix and update > guest's APCB > s390/vfio-ap: reset queues filtered from the guest's AP config > s390/vfio-ap: reset queues associated with adapter for queue unbound > from driver > s390/vfio-ap: do not reset queue removed from host config > > drivers/s390/crypto/vfio_ap_ops.c | 268 +++++++++++++++++--------- > drivers/s390/crypto/vfio_ap_private.h | 11 +- > 2 files changed, 184 insertions(+), 95 deletions(-) >
On 1/8/24 17:52, Anthony Krowiak wrote: > PING! > You're waiting for review of the last patch, right?
On 1/9/24 3:27 AM, Janosch Frank wrote: > On 1/8/24 17:52, Anthony Krowiak wrote: >> PING! >> > You're waiting for review of the last patch, right? Patch 6/6 does not have an r-b, so yes, that is one thing. The other's have been reviewed internally with some receiving only an acked-by, so I guess I'm looking for a final blessing so they can be merged. If I'm not mistaken, the primary problem for which theses patches were created - i.e., not resetting all queues when an adapter is removed from the guest - will cause unique problems for SE guests that are bound/associated. That being the case, I think these patches need to be merged sooner rather than later.