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=-6.6 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS 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 A4073C0044D for ; Mon, 16 Mar 2020 16:40:57 +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 6D56B20409 for ; Mon, 16 Mar 2020 16:40:57 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="Qv2n2CHB" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 6D56B20409 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Received: from localhost ([::1]:42504 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jDsnQ-00023s-KD for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Mon, 16 Mar 2020 12:40:56 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:50267) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jDqim-0007oH-L4 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 16 Mar 2020 10:28:02 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1jDqil-0000Dm-GH for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 16 Mar 2020 10:28:00 -0400 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com ([207.211.31.120]:36043 helo=us-smtp-1.mimecast.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1jDqil-0000BI-AK for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 16 Mar 2020 10:27:59 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1584368879; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=CoppFsbbvyA7kK0N+2AWfM9tZdwTTZmszHuy1FLWWSM=; b=Qv2n2CHBseZgbUIK4PhVS1isviBu4znaN7pzP8Uk5tqMrivVXMtrHLuaNS3dO4gbxCABak t4EbsBulIXdnCoZikWF7v96k9yOCVT8GpWY8ouX5luraODtDRlKw1WjgCwDdR6S16ZOXbe JNfKZbW4lTqS+q9wMx/jOwwTV6eCR/k= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-219-SB-_A9JANSyPGec6i0HLJQ-1; Mon, 16 Mar 2020 10:27:57 -0400 X-MC-Unique: SB-_A9JANSyPGec6i0HLJQ-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx07.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.22]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 29C86800D50; Mon, 16 Mar 2020 14:27:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from gondolin (ovpn-117-70.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.117.70]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2251910027B9; Mon, 16 Mar 2020 14:27:40 +0000 (UTC) Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2020 15:27:38 +0100 From: Cornelia Huck To: Janosch Frank Subject: Re: [PATCH v9] fixup! Fix subcode/pbt Message-ID: <20200316152738.4c1c65ee.cohuck@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <20200313095232.2392-1-frankja@linux.ibm.com> References: <20200313095232.2392-1-frankja@linux.ibm.com> Organization: Red Hat GmbH MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.84 on 10.5.11.22 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] [fuzzy] X-Received-From: 207.211.31.120 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, 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 05:52:32 -0400 Janosch Frank wrote: > Signed-off-by: Janosch Frank > --- > hw/s390x/ipl.h | 11 +++++++---- > target/s390x/diag.c | 2 +- > 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/hw/s390x/ipl.h b/hw/s390x/ipl.h > index 95e3183c9cccf8b6..f799f7cfcf4763b1 100644 > --- a/hw/s390x/ipl.h > +++ b/hw/s390x/ipl.h > @@ -261,15 +261,18 @@ static inline bool ipl_valid_pv_header(IplParameterBlock *iplb) > return true; > } > > -static inline bool iplb_valid(IplParameterBlock *iplb) > +static inline bool iplb_valid(IplParameterBlock *iplb, uint64_t subcode) > { > switch (iplb->pbt) { > case S390_IPL_TYPE_FCP: > - return be32_to_cpu(iplb->len) >= S390_IPLB_MIN_FCP_LEN; > + return (subcode == DIAG308_SET && > + be32_to_cpu(iplb->len) >= S390_IPLB_MIN_FCP_LEN); > case S390_IPL_TYPE_CCW: > - return be32_to_cpu(iplb->len) >= S390_IPLB_MIN_CCW_LEN; > + return (subcode == DIAG308_SET && > + be32_to_cpu(iplb->len) >= S390_IPLB_MIN_CCW_LEN); > case S390_IPL_TYPE_PV: > - if (be32_to_cpu(iplb->len) < S390_IPLB_MIN_PV_LEN) { > + if (subcode != DIAG308_PV_SET || > + be32_to_cpu(iplb->len) < S390_IPLB_MIN_PV_LEN) { > return false; I'm not sure I like passing the subcode here... > } > if (!ipl_valid_pv_header(iplb)) { > diff --git a/target/s390x/diag.c b/target/s390x/diag.c > index b1ca81633b83bbdc..d4f33db5c23c818d 100644 > --- a/target/s390x/diag.c > +++ b/target/s390x/diag.c > @@ -118,7 +118,7 @@ void handle_diag_308(CPUS390XState *env, uint64_t r1, uint64_t r3, uintptr_t ra) > > cpu_physical_memory_read(addr, iplb, be32_to_cpu(iplb->len)); > > - if (!iplb_valid(iplb)) { > + if (!iplb_valid(iplb, subcode)) { > env->regs[r1 + 1] = DIAG_308_RC_INVALID; > goto out; > } ...because you're basically checking whether you either have a valid normal iplb, or a valid pv iplb, with the two being mutually exclusive, IIUC. So what about introducing iplb_valid_pv and calling that for the pv case? Would be a bit nicer to read, I think, and also matches what you do for the STORE case.