* [PATCH] s390/sclp: improve special wait psw logic
@ 2020-02-20 13:16 Christian Borntraeger
2020-02-20 13:26 ` David Hildenbrand
` (2 more replies)
0 siblings, 3 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Christian Borntraeger @ 2020-02-20 13:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Cornelia Huck
Cc: Janosch Frank, David Hildenbrand, qemu-devel, qemu-stable,
Christian Borntraeger, qemu-s390x, Richard Henderson
There is a special quiesce PSW that we check for "shutdown". Otherwise disabled
wait is detected as "crashed". Architecturally we must only check PSW bits
116-127. Fix this.
Cc: qemu-stable@nongnu.org
Signed-off-by: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>
---
target/s390x/helper.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/target/s390x/helper.c b/target/s390x/helper.c
index a3a4916..6808dfd 100644
--- a/target/s390x/helper.c
+++ b/target/s390x/helper.c
@@ -89,7 +89,7 @@ hwaddr s390_cpu_get_phys_addr_debug(CPUState *cs, vaddr vaddr)
static inline bool is_special_wait_psw(uint64_t psw_addr)
{
/* signal quiesce */
- return psw_addr == 0xfffUL;
+ return (psw_addr & 0xfffUL) == 0xfffUL;
}
void s390_handle_wait(S390CPU *cpu)
--
1.8.3.1
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] s390/sclp: improve special wait psw logic
2020-02-20 13:16 [PATCH] s390/sclp: improve special wait psw logic Christian Borntraeger
@ 2020-02-20 13:26 ` David Hildenbrand
2020-02-20 13:35 ` Christian Borntraeger
2020-02-20 13:47 ` Janosch Frank
2020-02-20 17:00 ` Cornelia Huck
2 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: David Hildenbrand @ 2020-02-20 13:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Christian Borntraeger, Cornelia Huck
Cc: Janosch Frank, qemu-s390x, qemu-stable, qemu-devel,
Richard Henderson
On 20.02.20 14:16, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> There is a special quiesce PSW that we check for "shutdown". Otherwise disabled
> wait is detected as "crashed". Architecturally we must only check PSW bits
> 116-127. Fix this.
>
> Cc: qemu-stable@nongnu.org
Is this really stable material?
Reviewed-by: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
--
Thanks,
David / dhildenb
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] s390/sclp: improve special wait psw logic
2020-02-20 13:26 ` David Hildenbrand
@ 2020-02-20 13:35 ` Christian Borntraeger
2020-02-20 16:27 ` Cornelia Huck
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Christian Borntraeger @ 2020-02-20 13:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: David Hildenbrand, Cornelia Huck
Cc: Janosch Frank, qemu-s390x, qemu-stable, qemu-devel,
Richard Henderson
On 20.02.20 14:26, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 20.02.20 14:16, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
>> There is a special quiesce PSW that we check for "shutdown". Otherwise disabled
>> wait is detected as "crashed". Architecturally we must only check PSW bits
>> 116-127. Fix this.
>>
>> Cc: qemu-stable@nongnu.org
>
> Is this really stable material?
Guests that end with lets say 0xaafffUL would be considered "crashed" instead of "shutdown".
I will let Conny decide.
>
> Reviewed-by: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] s390/sclp: improve special wait psw logic
2020-02-20 13:35 ` Christian Borntraeger
@ 2020-02-20 16:27 ` Cornelia Huck
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Cornelia Huck @ 2020-02-20 16:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Christian Borntraeger
Cc: Janosch Frank, David Hildenbrand, qemu-devel, qemu-stable,
qemu-s390x, Richard Henderson
On Thu, 20 Feb 2020 14:35:01 +0100
Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com> wrote:
> On 20.02.20 14:26, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> > On 20.02.20 14:16, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> >> There is a special quiesce PSW that we check for "shutdown". Otherwise disabled
> >> wait is detected as "crashed". Architecturally we must only check PSW bits
> >> 116-127. Fix this.
> >>
> >> Cc: qemu-stable@nongnu.org
> >
> > Is this really stable material?
>
> Guests that end with lets say 0xaafffUL would be considered "crashed" instead of "shutdown".
> I will let Conny decide.
It cannot really hurt; but would be interesting if you have seen that
in the wild.
> >
> > Reviewed-by: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
> >
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] s390/sclp: improve special wait psw logic
2020-02-20 13:16 [PATCH] s390/sclp: improve special wait psw logic Christian Borntraeger
2020-02-20 13:26 ` David Hildenbrand
@ 2020-02-20 13:47 ` Janosch Frank
2020-02-20 17:00 ` Cornelia Huck
2 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Janosch Frank @ 2020-02-20 13:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Christian Borntraeger, Cornelia Huck
Cc: Janosch Frank, David Hildenbrand, qemu-stable, qemu-devel,
qemu-s390x, Richard Henderson
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 960 bytes --]
On 2/20/20 2:16 PM, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> There is a special quiesce PSW that we check for "shutdown". Otherwise disabled
> wait is detected as "crashed". Architecturally we must only check PSW bits
> 116-127. Fix this.
>
> Cc: qemu-stable@nongnu.org
> Signed-off-by: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>
Acked-by: Janosch Frank <frankja@linux.ibm.com>
> ---
> target/s390x/helper.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/target/s390x/helper.c b/target/s390x/helper.c
> index a3a4916..6808dfd 100644
> --- a/target/s390x/helper.c
> +++ b/target/s390x/helper.c
> @@ -89,7 +89,7 @@ hwaddr s390_cpu_get_phys_addr_debug(CPUState *cs, vaddr vaddr)
> static inline bool is_special_wait_psw(uint64_t psw_addr)
> {
> /* signal quiesce */
> - return psw_addr == 0xfffUL;
> + return (psw_addr & 0xfffUL) == 0xfffUL;
> }
>
> void s390_handle_wait(S390CPU *cpu)
>
[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] s390/sclp: improve special wait psw logic
2020-02-20 13:16 [PATCH] s390/sclp: improve special wait psw logic Christian Borntraeger
2020-02-20 13:26 ` David Hildenbrand
2020-02-20 13:47 ` Janosch Frank
@ 2020-02-20 17:00 ` Cornelia Huck
2 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Cornelia Huck @ 2020-02-20 17:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Christian Borntraeger
Cc: Janosch Frank, David Hildenbrand, qemu-devel, qemu-stable,
qemu-s390x, Richard Henderson
On Thu, 20 Feb 2020 14:16:22 +0100
Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com> wrote:
> There is a special quiesce PSW that we check for "shutdown". Otherwise disabled
> wait is detected as "crashed". Architecturally we must only check PSW bits
> 116-127. Fix this.
>
> Cc: qemu-stable@nongnu.org
> Signed-off-by: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>
> ---
> target/s390x/helper.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
Thanks, applied.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2020-02-20 17:05 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2020-02-20 13:16 [PATCH] s390/sclp: improve special wait psw logic Christian Borntraeger
2020-02-20 13:26 ` David Hildenbrand
2020-02-20 13:35 ` Christian Borntraeger
2020-02-20 16:27 ` Cornelia Huck
2020-02-20 13:47 ` Janosch Frank
2020-02-20 17:00 ` Cornelia Huck
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).