From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.3 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_SANE_2 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0CE16C10DCE for ; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 14:30:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C9ACA206B7 for ; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 14:30:17 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org C9ACA206B7 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.ibm.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Received: from localhost ([::1]:59836 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jClKL-0002Al-1a for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 10:30:17 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:52162) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jClJV-0001Kn-HI for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 10:29:28 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1jClJT-0002Xk-NW for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 10:29:25 -0400 Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.156.1]:49162) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1jClJT-0002W6-Fa for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 10:29:23 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098393.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 02DEPpN4025138 for ; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 10:29:22 -0400 Received: from e06smtp02.uk.ibm.com (e06smtp02.uk.ibm.com [195.75.94.98]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2yqyuwk40r-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 10:29:21 -0400 Received: from localhost by e06smtp02.uk.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 14:29:19 -0000 Received: from b06avi18878370.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (9.149.26.194) by e06smtp02.uk.ibm.com (192.168.101.132) with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted; (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256/256) Fri, 13 Mar 2020 14:29:16 -0000 Received: from d06av26.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06av26.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.105.62]) by b06avi18878370.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 02DETFoW37617966 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 13 Mar 2020 14:29:15 GMT Received: from d06av26.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10894AE051; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 14:29:15 +0000 (GMT) Received: from d06av26.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id ADC3BAE04D; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 14:29:14 +0000 (GMT) Received: from p-imbrenda (unknown [9.145.5.97]) by d06av26.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 14:29:14 +0000 (GMT) Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2020 15:29:13 +0100 From: Claudio Imbrenda To: Janosch Frank Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 09/15] s390x: protvirt: Set guest IPL PSW In-Reply-To: <10063e5d-7c4f-da0b-fe20-c8d94c958111@linux.ibm.com> References: <20200311132151.172389-1-frankja@linux.ibm.com> <20200311132151.172389-10-frankja@linux.ibm.com> <20200313135733.634c0008@p-imbrenda> <10063e5d-7c4f-da0b-fe20-c8d94c958111@linux.ibm.com> Organization: IBM X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.17.5 (GTK+ 2.24.32; x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 x-cbid: 20031314-0008-0000-0000-0000035CAB18 X-IBM-AV-DETECTION: SAVI=unused REMOTE=unused XFE=unused x-cbparentid: 20031314-0009-0000-0000-00004A7DF868 Message-Id: <20200313152913.6c51c4bd@p-imbrenda> X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.138, 18.0.572 definitions=2020-03-13_05:2020-03-12, 2020-03-13 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 phishscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 suspectscore=0 spamscore=0 priorityscore=1501 impostorscore=0 mlxscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 bulkscore=0 malwarescore=0 adultscore=0 clxscore=1015 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2003020000 definitions=main-2003130074 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 148.163.156.1 X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: borntraeger@de.ibm.com, qemu-s390x@nongnu.org, cohuck@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, david@redhat.com Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" On Fri, 13 Mar 2020 15:21:07 +0100 Janosch Frank wrote: > On 3/13/20 1:57 PM, Claudio Imbrenda wrote: > > On Wed, 11 Mar 2020 09:21:45 -0400 > > Janosch Frank wrote: > > > >> Handling of CPU reset and setting of the IPL psw from guest > >> storage at offset 0 is done by a Ultravisor call. Let's only fetch > >> it if necessary. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Janosch Frank > >> Reviewed-by: Thomas Huth > >> Reviewed-by: David Hildenbrand > >> --- > >> target/s390x/cpu.c | 22 +++++++++++++--------- > >> 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/target/s390x/cpu.c b/target/s390x/cpu.c > >> index 84029f14814b4980..a48d39f139cdc1c4 100644 > >> --- a/target/s390x/cpu.c > >> +++ b/target/s390x/cpu.c > >> @@ -78,16 +78,20 @@ static bool s390_cpu_has_work(CPUState *cs) > >> static void s390_cpu_load_normal(CPUState *s) > >> { > >> S390CPU *cpu = S390_CPU(s); > >> - uint64_t spsw = ldq_phys(s->as, 0); > >> - > >> - cpu->env.psw.mask = spsw & PSW_MASK_SHORT_CTRL; > >> - /* > >> - * Invert short psw indication, so SIE will report a > >> specification > >> - * exception if it was not set. > >> - */ > >> - cpu->env.psw.mask ^= PSW_MASK_SHORTPSW; > >> - cpu->env.psw.addr = spsw & PSW_MASK_SHORT_ADDR; > >> + uint64_t spsw; > >> > >> + if (!s390_is_pv()) { > >> + spsw = ldq_phys(s->as, 0); > >> + cpu->env.psw.mask = spsw & PSW_MASK_SHORT_CTRL; > >> + /* > >> + * Invert short psw indication, so SIE will report a > >> specification > >> + * exception if it was not set. > >> + */ > >> + cpu->env.psw.mask ^= PSW_MASK_SHORTPSW; > >> + cpu->env.psw.addr = spsw & PSW_MASK_SHORT_ADDR; > >> + } else { > >> + s390_cpu_set_state(S390_CPU_STATE_LOAD, cpu); > >> + } > >> s390_cpu_set_state(S390_CPU_STATE_OPERATING, cpu); > >> } > >> #endif > > > > I don't understand why you set the state to S390_CPU_STATE_LOAD and > > then immediately afterwards to S390_CPU_STATE_OPERATING, especially > > considering that both do the same > > > > Have a look at the specs, wee need to set the load state before > setting the cpu to operating. > > I can add a comment to make it clearer if you want. yes please.