On 11/21/19 1:14 PM, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 20.11.19 12:43, Janosch Frank wrote:
>> If a vcpu is not properly reset it might be better to just end the VM.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Janosch Frank <frankja@linux.ibm.com>
>> ---
>>   target/s390x/kvm.c | 2 ++
>>   1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/target/s390x/kvm.c b/target/s390x/kvm.c
>> index 190400df55..0210b54157 100644
>> --- a/target/s390x/kvm.c
>> +++ b/target/s390x/kvm.c
>> @@ -418,11 +418,13 @@ static void kvm_s390_reset_vcpu(S390CPU *cpu, unsigned long type)
>>           if (kvm_vcpu_ioctl(cs, KVM_S390_VCPU_RESET, type)) {
>>               error_report("CPU reset type %ld failed on CPU %i",
>>                            type, cs->cpu_index);
>> +            exit(1);
>>           }
>>           return;
>>       }
>>       if (kvm_vcpu_ioctl(cs, KVM_S390_INITIAL_RESET, NULL)) {
>>           error_report("Initial CPU reset failed on CPU %i", cs->cpu_index);
>> +        exit(1);
>>       }
>>   }
>>   
>>
> 
> According to the comment in include/qapi/error.h
> 
> "Please don't error_setg(&error_fatal, ...), use error_report() and 
> exit(), because that's more obvious."
> 
> This is the right thing to do.
> 
> ... and it's a fairly pathological thing to happen either way.
> 
> Reviewed-by: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
> 

Do we want to have that separate or should I squash it into the reset
changes?