qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH v3 4/4] pc-bios/s390x: Fix reset psw mask


From: Cornelia Huck
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 4/4] pc-bios/s390x: Fix reset psw mask
Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2019 18:22:51 +0100

On Tue,  3 Dec 2019 08:28:13 -0500
Janosch Frank <address@hidden> wrote:

> We need to set the short psw indication bit in the reset psw, as it is
> a short psw.
> 
> fixes: 9629823290 ("pc-bios/s390-ccw: do a subsystem reset before running the 
> guest")

s/fixes: 9629823290/Fixes: 962982329029/

> Signed-off-by: Janosch Frank <address@hidden>
> ---
>  pc-bios/s390-ccw/jump2ipl.c | 12 +++++++-----
>  1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/pc-bios/s390-ccw/jump2ipl.c b/pc-bios/s390-ccw/jump2ipl.c
> index 266f1502b9..da13c43cc0 100644
> --- a/pc-bios/s390-ccw/jump2ipl.c
> +++ b/pc-bios/s390-ccw/jump2ipl.c
> @@ -12,11 +12,11 @@
>  #define KERN_IMAGE_START 0x010000UL
>  #define PSW_MASK_64 0x0000000100000000ULL
>  #define PSW_MASK_32 0x0000000080000000ULL
> -#define IPL_PSW_MASK (PSW_MASK_32 | PSW_MASK_64)
> +#define PSW_MASK_SHORTPSW 0x0008000000000000ULL
> +#define RESET_PSW_MASK (PSW_MASK_SHORTPSW | PSW_MASK_32 | PSW_MASK_64)
>  
>  typedef struct ResetInfo {
> -    uint32_t ipl_mask;
> -    uint32_t ipl_addr;
> +    uint64_t ipl_psw;
>      uint32_t ipl_continue;
>  } ResetInfo;
>  
> @@ -50,7 +50,9 @@ void jump_to_IPL_code(uint64_t address)
>      ResetInfo *current = 0;
>  
>      save = *current;
> -    current->ipl_addr = (uint32_t) (uint64_t) &jump_to_IPL_2;
> +
> +    current->ipl_psw = (uint64_t) &jump_to_IPL_2;
> +    current->ipl_psw |= RESET_PSW_MASK;
>      current->ipl_continue = address & 0x7fffffff;
>  
>      debug_print_int("set IPL addr to", current->ipl_continue);
> @@ -82,7 +84,7 @@ void jump_to_low_kernel(void)
>      }
>  
>      /* Trying to get PSW at zero address */
> -    if (*((uint64_t *)0) & IPL_PSW_MASK) {
> +    if (*((uint64_t *)0) & RESET_PSW_MASK) {
>          jump_to_IPL_code((*((uint64_t *)0)) & 0x7fffffff);
>      }
>  

Looks sane to me, but would like an ack from bios maintainers.

As this is independent of the other patches (which depend on a headers
update), I can pick this and do a rebuild of the bios(es). Unless one
of the bios maintainers wants to do that and send me a pull req :), but
that seems like overkill.




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]