From: Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>
To: Pierre Morel <pmorel@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: thuth@redhat.com, Nico Boehr <nrb@linux.ibm.com>,
frankja@linux.ibm.com, cohuck@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org,
Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>,
borntraeger@de.ibm.com, qemu-s390x@nongnu.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH qemu] s390x/css: fix PMCW invalid mask
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2021 20:28:18 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20211217202818.7e843a1d.pasic@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7143886b-ffa2-e5f7-e7fe-b06212522824@linux.ibm.com>
On Fri, 17 Dec 2021 18:13:47 +0100
Pierre Morel <pmorel@linux.ibm.com> wrote:
> >> Previously, we required bits 5, 6 and 7 to be zero (0x07 == 0b111). But,
> >> as per the principles of operation, bit 5 is ignored in MSCH and bits 0,
> >> 1, 6 and 7 need to be zero.
> >
> > On a second thought, don't we have to make sure then that bit 5 is
> > ignored?
> >
> > static void copy_pmcw_from_guest(PMCW *dest, const PMCW *src)
> > {
> > int i;
> >
> > dest->intparm = be32_to_cpu(src->intparm);
> > dest->flags = be16_to_cpu(src->flags);
> > dest->devno = be16_to_cpu(src->devno);
> >
> > Here we seem to grab flags as a whole, but actually we would have to
> > mask of bit 5.
>
> Why?
> If this bit is ignored by the machine shouldn't we just ignore it?
> Forcing it to 0 or to 1 is purely arbitrary no?
We do the masking later on:
IOInstEnding css_do_msch(SubchDev *sch, const SCHIB *orig_schib)
{
[..]
/* Only update the program-modifiable fields. */
schib->pmcw.intparm = schib_copy.pmcw.intparm;
oldflags = schib->pmcw.flags;
schib->pmcw.flags &= ~(PMCW_FLAGS_MASK_ISC | PMCW_FLAGS_MASK_ENA |
PMCW_FLAGS_MASK_LM | PMCW_FLAGS_MASK_MME |
PMCW_FLAGS_MASK_MP);
schib->pmcw.flags |= schib_copy.pmcw.flags &
(PMCW_FLAGS_MASK_ISC | PMCW_FLAGS_MASK_ENA |
PMCW_FLAGS_MASK_LM | PMCW_FLAGS_MASK_MME |
PMCW_FLAGS_MASK_MP);
[..]
I just didn't read far enough. We do that for a while now.
The PoP says that the machine shall ignore other fields
of the PMCW when an MSCH is performed. I.e. we should not update
"our" pmcw.flags bit 5 from 0 to 1 even if 1 was supplied, and
thus STSCH should keep storing the bit 5 as 0 even if there was
a MSCH with bit 5 set.
Regards,
Halil
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-12-17 19:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-12-16 13:16 [PATCH qemu] s390x/css: fix PMCW invalid mask Nico Boehr
2021-12-17 13:58 ` Halil Pasic
2021-12-17 14:54 ` Halil Pasic
2021-12-17 17:13 ` Pierre Morel
2021-12-17 19:28 ` Halil Pasic [this message]
2021-12-20 10:44 ` Pierre Morel
2021-12-20 12:11 ` Halil Pasic
2021-12-22 16:46 ` Cornelia Huck
2021-12-23 10:41 ` Halil Pasic
2021-12-23 11:12 ` Cornelia Huck
2022-01-05 8:42 ` Thomas Huth
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20211217202818.7e843a1d.pasic@linux.ibm.com \
--to=pasic@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=borntraeger@de.ibm.com \
--cc=cohuck@redhat.com \
--cc=frankja@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=nrb@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=pmorel@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=qemu-s390x@nongnu.org \
--cc=thuth@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).