From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:52581) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1R1HJp-0002RD-Ud for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 07 Sep 2011 08:33:31 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1R1HJk-0003J2-US for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 07 Sep 2011 08:33:29 -0400 Received: from mtagate1.uk.ibm.com ([194.196.100.161]:41317) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1R1HJk-0003IZ-NJ for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 07 Sep 2011 08:33:24 -0400 Received: from d06nrmr1507.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06nrmr1507.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.38.233]) by mtagate1.uk.ibm.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id p87CXLDg016919 for ; Wed, 7 Sep 2011 12:33:21 GMT Received: from d06av03.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06av03.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.37.213]) by d06nrmr1507.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id p87CXLue2560204 for ; Wed, 7 Sep 2011 13:33:21 +0100 Received: from d06av03.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by d06av03.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id p87CXKgN028079 for ; Wed, 7 Sep 2011 06:33:20 -0600 Message-ID: <4E67648F.70100@de.ibm.com> Date: Wed, 07 Sep 2011 14:33:19 +0200 From: Christian Borntraeger MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <4E6606F3.5020102@de.ibm.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] s390: remove boot image detection to fix boot with newer kernels List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Alexander Graf Cc: Carsten Otte , programming.philipp.muens@googlemail.com, "qemu-devel@nongnu.org" On 07/09/11 13:56, Alexander Graf wrote: > > On 06.09.2011, at 13:41, Christian Borntraeger wrote: > >> Alex, >> >> Newer kernels will not always have a 0dd0 (basr 13,0) at address 0x10000. >> (e.g. current linux-next). We must not rely on specific code at certain >> addresses, so lets just remove this check. > > Is there any other sane way we can find out if the image we're loading is > actually bootable? I don't want users to do qemu-system-s390x -kernel > vmlinux and see it just plain fail. No, in theory it could change arbitrarily. The vmlinux case is unfortunate but in the end its "shoot yourself in the foot", we just have to make sure that we allow a graceful exit from a looping qemu guest. Christian