qemu-s390x
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: [PATCH v1 07/14] s390x/s390-hypercall: introduce DIAG500 STORAGE_LIM


From: Thomas Huth
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 07/14] s390x/s390-hypercall: introduce DIAG500 STORAGE_LIMIT
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2024 10:19:00 +0200
User-agent: Mozilla Thunderbird

On 10/09/2024 19.58, David Hildenbrand wrote:
A guest OS that supports memory hotplug / memory devices must during
boot be aware of the maximum possible physical memory address that it might
have to handle at a later stage during its runtime

For example, the maximum possible memory address might be required to
prepare the kernel virtual address space accordingly (e.g., select page
table hierarchy depth).

On s390x there is currently no such mechanism that is compatible with
paravirtualized memory devices, because the whole SCLP interface was
designed around the idea of "storage increments" and "standby memory".
Paravirtualized memory devices we want to support, such as virtio-mem, have
no intersection with any of that, but could co-exist with them in the
future if ever needed.

In particular, a guest OS must never detect and use device memory
without the help of a proper device driver. Device memory must not be
exposed in any firmware-provided memory map (SCLP or diag260 on s390x).
For this reason, these memory devices will be places in memory *above*
the "maximum storage increment" exposed via SCLP.

Let's provide a new diag500 subcode to query the memory limit determined in
s390_memory_init().

Signed-off-by: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
---
  hw/s390x/s390-hypercall.c | 3 +++
  hw/s390x/s390-hypercall.h | 1 +
  2 files changed, 4 insertions(+)

diff --git a/hw/s390x/s390-hypercall.c b/hw/s390x/s390-hypercall.c
index f09e8a1d81..ac48fc0961 100644
--- a/hw/s390x/s390-hypercall.c
+++ b/hw/s390x/s390-hypercall.c
@@ -68,6 +68,9 @@ int handle_diag_500(CPUS390XState *env)
      case DIAG500_VIRTIO_CCW_NOTIFY:
          env->regs[2] = handle_virtio_ccw_notify(env->regs[2], env->regs[3]);
          return 0;
+    case DIAG500_STORAGE_LIMIT:
+        env->regs[2] = s390_get_memory_limit() - 1;
+        return 0;
      default:
          return -EINVAL;
      }
diff --git a/hw/s390x/s390-hypercall.h b/hw/s390x/s390-hypercall.h
index b7ac29f444..f0ca62bcbb 100644
--- a/hw/s390x/s390-hypercall.h
+++ b/hw/s390x/s390-hypercall.h
@@ -18,6 +18,7 @@
  #define DIAG500_VIRTIO_RESET            1 /* legacy */
  #define DIAG500_VIRTIO_SET_STATUS       2 /* legacy */
  #define DIAG500_VIRTIO_CCW_NOTIFY       3 /* KVM_S390_VIRTIO_CCW_NOTIFY */
+#define DIAG500_STORAGE_LIMIT           4
int handle_diag_500(CPUS390XState *env);

Reviewed-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com>

Sounds very reasonable to me - but it would be good to get an Ack/Reviewed-by from IBM folks here (in case they prefer a different interface)... hope they'll join the discussion!

 Thomas




reply via email to

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