| Message ID | 20201021134345.110173-2-frankja@linux.ibm.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | s390x: pv: Diag318 fixes | expand |
On 21.10.20 15:43, Janosch Frank wrote: > The SCLP boundary cross check is done by the Ultravisor for a > protected guest, hence we don't need to do it. As QEMU doesn't get a > valid SCCB address in protected mode this is even problematic and can > lead to QEMU reporting a false boundary cross error. > > Signed-off-by: Janosch Frank <frankja@linux.ibm.com> > Reported-by: Marc Hartmayer <mhartmay@linux.ibm.com> > Fixes: db13387ca0 ("s390/sclp: rework sclp boundary checks") > Reviewed-by: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com> > Tested-by: Marc Hartmayer <mhartmay@linux.ibm.com> > --- > hw/s390x/sclp.c | 5 ----- > 1 file changed, 5 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/hw/s390x/sclp.c b/hw/s390x/sclp.c > index 00f1e4648d..0cf2290826 100644 > --- a/hw/s390x/sclp.c > +++ b/hw/s390x/sclp.c > @@ -285,11 +285,6 @@ int sclp_service_call_protected(CPUS390XState *env, uint64_t sccb, > goto out_write; > } > > - if (!sccb_verify_boundary(sccb, be16_to_cpu(work_sccb->h.length), code)) { > - work_sccb->h.response_code = cpu_to_be16(SCLP_RC_SCCB_BOUNDARY_VIOLATION); > - goto out_write; > - } > - > sclp_c->execute(sclp, work_sccb, code); > out_write: > s390_cpu_pv_mem_write(env_archcpu(env), 0, work_sccb, > Acked-by: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
On Wed, 21 Oct 2020 09:43:44 -0400 Janosch Frank <frankja@linux.ibm.com> wrote: > The SCLP boundary cross check is done by the Ultravisor for a > protected guest, hence we don't need to do it. As QEMU doesn't get a > valid SCCB address in protected mode this is even problematic and can > lead to QEMU reporting a false boundary cross error. > > Signed-off-by: Janosch Frank <frankja@linux.ibm.com> > Reported-by: Marc Hartmayer <mhartmay@linux.ibm.com> > Fixes: db13387ca0 ("s390/sclp: rework sclp boundary checks") > Reviewed-by: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com> > Tested-by: Marc Hartmayer <mhartmay@linux.ibm.com> Acked-by: Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com> > --- > hw/s390x/sclp.c | 5 ----- > 1 file changed, 5 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/hw/s390x/sclp.c b/hw/s390x/sclp.c > index 00f1e4648d..0cf2290826 100644 > --- a/hw/s390x/sclp.c > +++ b/hw/s390x/sclp.c > @@ -285,11 +285,6 @@ int sclp_service_call_protected(CPUS390XState *env, uint64_t sccb, > goto out_write; > } > > - if (!sccb_verify_boundary(sccb, be16_to_cpu(work_sccb->h.length), code)) { > - work_sccb->h.response_code = cpu_to_be16(SCLP_RC_SCCB_BOUNDARY_VIOLATION); > - goto out_write; > - } > - > sclp_c->execute(sclp, work_sccb, code); > out_write: > s390_cpu_pv_mem_write(env_archcpu(env), 0, work_sccb,
On 21/10/2020 15.43, Janosch Frank wrote: > The SCLP boundary cross check is done by the Ultravisor for a > protected guest, hence we don't need to do it. As QEMU doesn't get a > valid SCCB address in protected mode this is even problematic and can > lead to QEMU reporting a false boundary cross error. > > Signed-off-by: Janosch Frank <frankja@linux.ibm.com> > Reported-by: Marc Hartmayer <mhartmay@linux.ibm.com> > Fixes: db13387ca0 ("s390/sclp: rework sclp boundary checks") > Reviewed-by: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com> > Tested-by: Marc Hartmayer <mhartmay@linux.ibm.com> > --- > hw/s390x/sclp.c | 5 ----- > 1 file changed, 5 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/hw/s390x/sclp.c b/hw/s390x/sclp.c > index 00f1e4648d..0cf2290826 100644 > --- a/hw/s390x/sclp.c > +++ b/hw/s390x/sclp.c > @@ -285,11 +285,6 @@ int sclp_service_call_protected(CPUS390XState *env, uint64_t sccb, > goto out_write; > } > > - if (!sccb_verify_boundary(sccb, be16_to_cpu(work_sccb->h.length), code)) { > - work_sccb->h.response_code = cpu_to_be16(SCLP_RC_SCCB_BOUNDARY_VIOLATION); > - goto out_write; > - } > - > sclp_c->execute(sclp, work_sccb, code); > out_write: > s390_cpu_pv_mem_write(env_archcpu(env), 0, work_sccb, > Reviewed-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com>
diff --git a/hw/s390x/sclp.c b/hw/s390x/sclp.c index 00f1e4648d..0cf2290826 100644 --- a/hw/s390x/sclp.c +++ b/hw/s390x/sclp.c @@ -285,11 +285,6 @@ int sclp_service_call_protected(CPUS390XState *env, uint64_t sccb, goto out_write; } - if (!sccb_verify_boundary(sccb, be16_to_cpu(work_sccb->h.length), code)) { - work_sccb->h.response_code = cpu_to_be16(SCLP_RC_SCCB_BOUNDARY_VIOLATION); - goto out_write; - } - sclp_c->execute(sclp, work_sccb, code); out_write: s390_cpu_pv_mem_write(env_archcpu(env), 0, work_sccb,