From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:42465) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1djoAG-0000rA-8I for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 21 Aug 2017 10:58:53 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1djoAC-0004uq-5r for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 21 Aug 2017 10:58:52 -0400 Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.156.1]:45560) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1djoAB-0004u7-Sk for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 21 Aug 2017 10:58:48 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098396.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.21/8.16.0.21) with SMTP id v7LEveRt027079 for ; Mon, 21 Aug 2017 10:58:45 -0400 Received: from e06smtp10.uk.ibm.com (e06smtp10.uk.ibm.com [195.75.94.106]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2cg125jgrd-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Mon, 21 Aug 2017 10:58:45 -0400 Received: from localhost by e06smtp10.uk.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Mon, 21 Aug 2017 15:58:42 +0100 Received: from d06av21.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06av21.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.105.232]) by b06cxnps3074.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id v7LEwfcg24379510 for ; Mon, 21 Aug 2017 14:58:41 GMT Received: from d06av21.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5305452043 for ; Mon, 21 Aug 2017 14:54:20 +0100 (BST) Received: from [9.152.224.86] (unknown [9.152.224.86]) by d06av21.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3ADC752047 for ; Mon, 21 Aug 2017 14:54:20 +0100 (BST) References: <20170821091614.28251-1-cohuck@redhat.com> <20170821091614.28251-8-cohuck@redhat.com> From: Pierre Morel Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2017 16:58:41 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20170821091614.28251-8-cohuck@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Message-Id: <0d8dcac1-f536-5d69-0187-23656d003348@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v4 07/10] s390x/sclp: properly guard pci-specific functions List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org On 21/08/2017 11:16, Cornelia Huck wrote: > If we do not provide zpci, pci reconfiguration via sclp is not availabl= e > either. Don't indicate it in the sclp facilities and return an invalid > command if the guest tries to issue pci configure/deconfigure. >=20 > Reviewed-by: Thomas Huth > Signed-off-by: Cornelia Huck > --- > hw/s390x/sclp.c | 19 +++++++++++++++---- > 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) >=20 > diff --git a/hw/s390x/sclp.c b/hw/s390x/sclp.c > index 9253dbbc64..d0104cd784 100644 > --- a/hw/s390x/sclp.c > +++ b/hw/s390x/sclp.c > @@ -59,6 +59,7 @@ static void read_SCP_info(SCLPDevice *sclp, SCCB *scc= b) > int rnsize, rnmax; > int slots =3D MIN(machine->ram_slots, s390_get_memslot_count(kvm_= state)); > IplParameterBlock *ipib =3D s390_ipl_get_iplb(); > + uint64_t sclp_facilities =3D SCLP_HAS_CPU_INFO; >=20 > CPU_FOREACH(cpu) { > cpu_count++; > @@ -79,8 +80,10 @@ static void read_SCP_info(SCLPDevice *sclp, SCCB *sc= cb) >=20 > prepare_cpu_entries(sclp, read_info->entries, cpu_count); >=20 > - read_info->facilities =3D cpu_to_be64(SCLP_HAS_CPU_INFO | > - SCLP_HAS_PCI_RECONFIG); > + if (s390_has_feat(S390_FEAT_ZPCI)) { > + sclp_facilities |=3D SCLP_HAS_PCI_RECONFIG; > + } > + read_info->facilities =3D cpu_to_be64(sclp_facilities); >=20 > /* Memory Hotplug is only supported for the ccw machine type */ > if (mhd) { > @@ -385,10 +388,18 @@ static void sclp_execute(SCLPDevice *sclp, SCCB *= sccb, uint32_t code) > sclp_c->unassign_storage(sclp, sccb); > break; > case SCLP_CMDW_CONFIGURE_PCI: > - s390_pci_sclp_configure(sccb); > + if (s390_has_feat(S390_FEAT_ZPCI)) { > + s390_pci_sclp_configure(sccb); > + } else { > + sccb->h.response_code =3D cpu_to_be16(SCLP_RC_INVALID_SCLP= _COMMAND); Hello Conny, I find more logical if the response would be 0x06F0 : "Adapter type in=20 SCCB not recognized" Since we could have more than one adapter type... someday. then the SCLP command would be valid but not the adapter type. However, I will try to find a real hardware to test this since I noticed=20 that my logic sometime... :) . Another point is that don't you think that this test on S390_FEAT_ZPCI=20 better belong to the dedicated PCI code inside of the=20 s390_pci_sclp_configure(). best regards, Pierre > + } > break; > case SCLP_CMDW_DECONFIGURE_PCI: > - s390_pci_sclp_deconfigure(sccb); > + if (s390_has_feat(S390_FEAT_ZPCI)) { > + s390_pci_sclp_deconfigure(sccb); > + } else { > + sccb->h.response_code =3D cpu_to_be16(SCLP_RC_INVALID_SCLP= _COMMAND); > + } > break; > default: > efc->command_handler(ef, sccb, code); >=20 --=20 Pierre Morel Linux/KVM/QEMU in B=C3=B6blingen - Germany