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 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 smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CE8F6CE8342 for ; Mon, 30 Sep 2024 13:11:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1svGBF-0005YB-7l; Mon, 30 Sep 2024 09:11:14 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1svGB0-0005Pk-F5; Mon, 30 Sep 2024 09:10:59 -0400 Received: from mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.158.5]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1svGAy-0008TQ-Cm; Mon, 30 Sep 2024 09:10:58 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (m0353725.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.18.1.2/8.18.1.2) with ESMTP id 48U7CKRQ003593; Mon, 30 Sep 2024 13:10:53 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ibm.com; h= message-id:date:mime-version:subject:to:cc:references:from :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=pp1; bh=s 122WQDTTgRnYEgG2pyV5V93rzZfCyCBFPWQVAYNJRg=; b=aLwbQtlVscJmfAjDs NV16V1kN2CJhA+s86REBrszDU6q5ajVjgpTm1CTCzphO1d4tDjT9ab11zQ0IT3u3 YULSww0TZfKZfXqbtVmjNzpXn1JvVDjgdAVb8kw/xvjmBHHtIp9N2PGUHSFOVUxm MIuBelyn7udQo4ma4bVmvh5ZHGGGW3oo6iwE4lba2tc592fdsluQsO+NvS9lRGoE bVgldbdDQElkzTzcwgTOZoxaD5EmZY2gUyP+bPclhQm47qkTqz1RXA6PE2VrYoiN RNZAVMaJXIj9svAYzvYX92nsVbVncfvQ/hEzm6E1+PUgg1RRoox2BUsFkUl+XTTa 1a7ww== Received: from pps.reinject (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 41x87khpym-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Mon, 30 Sep 2024 13:10:53 +0000 (GMT) Received: from m0353725.ppops.net (m0353725.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by pps.reinject (8.18.0.8/8.18.0.8) with ESMTP id 48UDArTO029288; Mon, 30 Sep 2024 13:10:53 GMT 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 41x87khpyf-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Mon, 30 Sep 2024 13:10:53 +0000 (GMT) Received: from pps.filterd (ppma12.dal12v.mail.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma12.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (8.18.1.2/8.18.1.2) with ESMTP id 48UASs4C020432; Mon, 30 Sep 2024 13:10:52 GMT Received: from smtprelay03.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com ([172.16.1.70]) by ppma12.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 41xv4rxv0w-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Mon, 30 Sep 2024 13:10:52 +0000 Received: from smtpav01.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (smtpav01.dal12v.mail.ibm.com [10.241.53.100]) by smtprelay03.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 48UDApDx28967572 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Mon, 30 Sep 2024 13:10:51 GMT Received: from smtpav01.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5301E5805D; Mon, 30 Sep 2024 13:10:51 +0000 (GMT) Received: from smtpav01.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id EAE0558058; Mon, 30 Sep 2024 13:10:50 +0000 (GMT) Received: from [9.61.73.98] (unknown [9.61.73.98]) by smtpav01.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Mon, 30 Sep 2024 13:10:50 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: <22db2acb-dc43-4c24-bc7b-95eacd274a7a@linux.ibm.com> Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2024 09:10:50 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/18] pc-bios/s390-ccw: Remove panics from ISO IPL path To: Thomas Huth , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, qemu-s390x@nongnu.org Cc: frankja@linux.ibm.com References: <20240927005117.1679506-1-jrossi@linux.ibm.com> <20240927005117.1679506-8-jrossi@linux.ibm.com> <77cad234-524d-4166-ab1b-10666c8c676e@redhat.com> <00351eda-78c2-46f6-a122-3527736d0fa5@linux.ibm.com> <614a48bd-0130-434a-8a9b-6e3059254f2a@redhat.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Jared Rossi In-Reply-To: <614a48bd-0130-434a-8a9b-6e3059254f2a@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-GUID: 6NxVXC4Af_tW5iC3upwN4yniCqi9tf0S X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: rg1C_34x_bPqji4tWaZ0u5j6Qqfio2xe X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.293,Aquarius:18.0.1051,Hydra:6.0.680,FMLib:17.12.62.30 definitions=2024-09-30_12,2024-09-30_01,2024-09-30_01 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 malwarescore=0 impostorscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 clxscore=1015 phishscore=0 spamscore=0 priorityscore=1501 mlxscore=0 mlxlogscore=381 adultscore=0 suspectscore=0 bulkscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.19.0-2408220000 definitions=main-2409300095 Received-SPF: pass client-ip=148.163.158.5; envelope-from=jrossi@linux.ibm.com; helo=mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com X-Spam_score_int: -26 X-Spam_score: -2.7 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.7 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_SAFE_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org >>>> +    if (!virtio_read_many(block_offset, load_addr, blks_to_load)) { > > ... but this code here checks that virtio_read_many() now returns 0 to > signal that there is an error... > > Either I need more coffee or one of the two if-conditions is wrong...? > Hmm, I think you are sufficiently caffeinated... I agree that something is mixed up here. I suspect I got some wires crossed when I was doing the read_iso_sector() rework/removal.  I will double check all of the IPL_assert() reworks and uniformly remove the read_iso_sector() calls so it is consistent in that regard. I’ll also take a closer look at my test coverage, because the mismatched error conditions should always cause incorrect IPL behavior here, which seems to indicate this code path was not properly exercised... Jared Rossi