Re: [PATCH v1 00/23] s390/vfio-ap: Implement live guest migration of guests using AP devices

From: Anthony Krowiak

Date: Wed Apr 01 2026 - 09:44:48 EST




On 3/31/26 1:40 PM, Alex Williamson wrote:
On Tue, 31 Mar 2026 08:07:06 -0400
Anthony Krowiak <akrowiak@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On 3/30/26 12:27 PM, Alex Williamson wrote:
On Wed, 25 Mar 2026 17:00:47 -0400
Anthony Krowiak <akrowiak@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
This patch series implements live guest migration of a guest to which AP
devices have been passed through. To better comprehend this design, one has
to understand that VFIO AP mediated device is not used to provide userspace
with direct access to a device as is the case with other devices that use
the VFIO framework to pass them through to a guest. The sole purpose of the
VFIO AP mediated device is to manage an AP configuration for a guest. An AP
configuration is comprised of the AP adapter IDs (APID), AP queue
indexes (APQI) and domain numbers of the control domains to which a guest
will be granted access. Once the VFIO AP mediated device is attached to a
guest, its AP configuration is set by the vfio_ap device driver. Once set,
all access to the AP devices is handled by the s390 Interpretive Execution
facility; in other words, the vfio_ap device driver plays no role in
providing direct access to the AP devices in the guest's AP configuration.

The only role that the vfio_ap device driver plays in the migration
process is to verify that the AP configuration for the source guest is
compatible with the AP configuration of the destination guest.
Incompatibility will result in a live guest migration failure.
In order to be compatible, the following requirements must be met:

1. The destination guest will be started with the same QEMU command line
as the source guest, so the mediated device supplying the AP
configuration on both guests must have the same name (UUID).
AFAIK, same UUID is not a requirement for out-of-tree mdev drivers
supporting migration. You're really concerned more with the
configuration/composition of the mdev device, so requiring the same
UUID seems a bit arbitrary.
Combining replies:

On Tue, 31 Mar 2026 07:17:08 -0400
Anthony Krowiak <akrowiak@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
As stated above, the destination guest will be started with the same
QEMU command line as the source guest. Within that command line
will be a '-device' parameter like the following:

-device
'{"driver":"vfio-ap","id":"hostdev0","sysfsdev":"/sys/bus/mdev/devices/62177883-f1bb-47f0-914d-32a22e3a8804"}

Note that sysfsdev is the path to the mdev named
62177883-f1bb-47f0-914d-32a22e3a8804;
therefore, the mdev with that name must exist on the destination guest or
the migration will fail with the following error:

error: device not found: mediated device
'62177883-f1bb-47f0-914d-32a22e3a8804' not found
Then this is a requirement of your tooling, not a kernel requirement, not
something the kernel should care about. QEMU matches devices by their
virtual bus path, not the sysfsdev or host attributes. In the case of
VF migration with vfio-pci variant drivers we cannot require that the
source and target devices exist at the same bus address. Ideally the
pre-copy data from the source device to the target will include relevant
configuration information to validate that the source and target are
compatible, regardless of the uuid.

Maybe the problem here is stating that having the same UUID is a
requirement in the patch series description. I agree this is
not a kernel requirement; however, a live guest migration will not
succeed unless the destination host has a mediated device with
a UUID that matches that of the UUID of the mediated device used
to pass through s390 crypto devices to the source guest for the
reason I stated above. Would it help if I removed item #1 as a
requirement?


2. The AP configuration assigned via the VFIO AP mediated device on both
guests must be compatible. As such, each AP configuration must meet
the following requirements:

* Both guests must have the same number of APQNs

* Each APQN assigned to the source guest must also be assigned to the
destination guest

* Each APQN assigned to both guests must reference an AP queue with the
same hardware capabilities
Why isn't this sufficient vs also requiring the same UUID?
I explained why in my previous response.
See above, userspace tooling requirements don't imply kernel
requirement.

Got it.

A userspace interface can still exist, I just don't find this path
through the driver to the VM acceptable with this justification.
Mechanisms already exist for the device to refuse a state transition or
generate an error for a migration already in progress. IMHO, it would
be acceptable for the device to block a key change if the migration is
already in progress. If the key change cannot be represented in the
migration data stream, then it's up to the orchestration of the
migration to make sure they stay synchronized, but I don't see that
the vfio uAPI needs to be involved. Thanks,

As I stated in the cover letter description, all access to the AP devices is handled by the s390 Interpretive Execution facility, so without a complete redesign of the vfio_ap device driver, there is no way to know that a master key change is being requested. I do get your point, however, so I will figure out how best to handle this in userspace. Thanks for you review.

Alex