From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=ibm.com header.i=@ibm.com header.b="DAiz5YT8" Received: from mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com [148.163.158.5]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 73CAB10CA; Fri, 8 Dec 2023 03:24:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from pps.filterd (m0353722.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.17.1.19/8.17.1.19) with ESMTP id 3B8BHvdN023292; Fri, 8 Dec 2023 11:24:04 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ibm.com; h=message-id : subject : from : to : cc : date : in-reply-to : references : content-type : content-transfer-encoding : mime-version; s=pp1; bh=JRLtADp3bCNbFs+ji25sdAY6QNr59LedRAYMmwGEKxc=; b=DAiz5YT8oSOhfyJOSy5quUapwLFWhJIl8JIYgGSSBuCB2b39DM2vKFzVlZ6PyOnehenY mkSikqnmexO5S6X2Aj8CYbJ/b88GyRqLrO5ZwSw5pvXL8PHNbdOmkag6vYPwmXojmT3j OaZ4Uuz+vbzjb12eT83bag+Y9coVbvJ603ZvOGfpXdkEF984eiiitKb73qpgxuhPndGD qVodV2pcO5MG9NT3olc0EQtsBeSkZt/SfWRPn5BQC2dpqVxQEIJXDViwmstZjfZpG6VW EURYyvOS7Nvr1hnCkUIQGu8JO2qRuOMI+SSlHbEtTe730h/hRIps+jtyiLhRrmoDIRDq 4Q== Received: from ppma12.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (dc.9e.1632.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [50.22.158.220]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 3uv254g4hy-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 08 Dec 2023 11:24:04 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (ppma12.dal12v.mail.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma12.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (8.17.1.19/8.17.1.19) with ESMTP id 3B89bAsN004681; Fri, 8 Dec 2023 11:24:03 GMT Received: from smtprelay04.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com ([172.16.1.71]) by ppma12.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 3utav4s9dv-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 08 Dec 2023 11:24:03 +0000 Received: from smtpav01.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (smtpav01.dal12v.mail.ibm.com [10.241.53.100]) by smtprelay04.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 3B8BO2wl50790804 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 8 Dec 2023 11:24:02 GMT Received: from smtpav01.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2176B58057; Fri, 8 Dec 2023 11:24:02 +0000 (GMT) Received: from smtpav01.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4501658059; Fri, 8 Dec 2023 11:24:01 +0000 (GMT) Received: from li-479af74c-31f9-11b2-a85c-e4ddee11713b.ibm.com (unknown [9.61.97.239]) by smtpav01.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Fri, 8 Dec 2023 11:24:01 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: <0fe89d1a4ef539bef4bdf2302faf23f6d5848bf2.camel@linux.ibm.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: s390: fix cc for successful PQAP From: Eric Farman To: Janosch Frank , Christian Borntraeger , Claudio Imbrenda , Tony Krowiak , Halil Pasic , Jason Herne Cc: Sven Schnelle , Heiko Carstens , Vasily Gorbik , linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org Date: Fri, 08 Dec 2023 06:24:00 -0500 In-Reply-To: References: <20231201181657.1614645-1-farman@linux.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable User-Agent: Evolution 3.48.4 (3.48.4-1.fc38) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-GUID: 9rsho7wf6X6PBVh4jmEc8GxpS8TfXr9U X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: 9rsho7wf6X6PBVh4jmEc8GxpS8TfXr9U X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.272,Aquarius:18.0.997,Hydra:6.0.619,FMLib:17.11.176.26 definitions=2023-12-08_06,2023-12-07_01,2023-05-22_02 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 lowpriorityscore=0 bulkscore=0 suspectscore=0 mlxscore=0 phishscore=0 adultscore=0 mlxlogscore=762 malwarescore=0 priorityscore=1501 clxscore=1015 impostorscore=0 spamscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2311290000 definitions=main-2312080095 On Fri, 2023-12-08 at 11:31 +0100, Janosch Frank wrote: > On 12/1/23 19:16, Eric Farman wrote: > > The various errors that are possible when processing a PQAP > > instruction (the absence of a driver hook, an error FROM that > > hook), all correctly set the PSW condition code to 3. But if > > that processing works successfully, CC0 needs to be set to > > convey that everything was fine. > >=20 > > Fix the check so that the guest can examine the condition code > > to determine whether GPR1 has meaningful data. > >=20 >=20 > Hey Eric, I have yet to see this produce a fail in my AP KVM unit > tests. > If you find some spare time I'd like to discuss how I can extend my > test=20 > so that I can see the fail before it's fixed. >=20 Hi Janosch, absolutely. I had poked around kvm-unit-tests before I sent this up to see if I could adapt something to show this scenario, but came up empty and didn't want to go too far down that rabbit hole creating something from scratch. I'll ping you offline to find a time to talk. Eric