From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BFFCAC433E1 for ; Fri, 24 Jul 2020 15:07:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 91521206D7 for ; Fri, 24 Jul 2020 15:07:14 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 91521206D7 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.ibm.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Received: from localhost ([::1]:57676 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jyzI1-000404-TM for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Fri, 24 Jul 2020 11:07:13 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:59580) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jyzHA-00035I-72; Fri, 24 Jul 2020 11:06:20 -0400 Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.156.1]:55574) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jyzH8-0002FS-DK; Fri, 24 Jul 2020 11:06:19 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098399.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 06OF3Y4c124621; Fri, 24 Jul 2020 11:06:15 -0400 Received: from pps.reinject (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 32fux7br61-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 24 Jul 2020 11:06:14 -0400 Received: from m0098399.ppops.net (m0098399.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by pps.reinject (8.16.0.36/8.16.0.36) with SMTP id 06OF4Bmk131030; Fri, 24 Jul 2020 11:06:14 -0400 Received: from ppma05wdc.us.ibm.com (1b.90.2fa9.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [169.47.144.27]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 32fux7br5d-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 24 Jul 2020 11:06:14 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (ppma05wdc.us.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma05wdc.us.ibm.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 06OF5UrH031163; Fri, 24 Jul 2020 15:06:13 GMT Received: from b01cxnp22035.gho.pok.ibm.com (b01cxnp22035.gho.pok.ibm.com [9.57.198.25]) by ppma05wdc.us.ibm.com with ESMTP id 32brq9d88e-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 24 Jul 2020 15:06:13 +0000 Received: from b01ledav006.gho.pok.ibm.com (b01ledav006.gho.pok.ibm.com [9.57.199.111]) by b01cxnp22035.gho.pok.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 06OF6CIp43647344 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 24 Jul 2020 15:06:12 GMT Received: from b01ledav006.gho.pok.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 831B4AC064; Fri, 24 Jul 2020 15:06:12 +0000 (GMT) Received: from b01ledav006.gho.pok.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2112FAC05F; Fri, 24 Jul 2020 15:06:12 +0000 (GMT) Received: from localhost.localdomain (unknown [9.85.200.156]) by b01ledav006.gho.pok.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Fri, 24 Jul 2020 15:06:12 +0000 (GMT) Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 3/8] s390/sclp: rework sclp boundary and length checks To: Cornelia Huck References: <20200624202312.28349-1-walling@linux.ibm.com> <20200624202312.28349-4-walling@linux.ibm.com> <89b72ce5-39c7-3080-286a-ab6ed59afb7e@redhat.com> <20200723082626.5f2bda1b.cohuck@redhat.com> From: Collin Walling Message-ID: <28a774cb-afa7-eeaa-2c07-add4c4f54d8b@linux.ibm.com> Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2020 11:06:11 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.9.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20200723082626.5f2bda1b.cohuck@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.235, 18.0.687 definitions=2020-07-24_05:2020-07-24, 2020-07-24 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 impostorscore=0 adultscore=0 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 mlxscore=0 priorityscore=1501 lowpriorityscore=0 clxscore=1015 spamscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 bulkscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2006250000 definitions=main-2007240117 Received-SPF: pass client-ip=148.163.156.1; envelope-from=walling@linux.ibm.com; helo=mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: First seen = 2020/07/24 09:30:16 X-ACL-Warn: Detected OS = Linux 3.x [generic] [fuzzy] X-Spam_score_int: -35 X-Spam_score: -3.6 X-Spam_bar: --- X-Spam_report: (-3.6 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: thuth@redhat.com, frankja@linux.ibm.com, David Hildenbrand , mst@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, pasic@linux.ibm.com, borntraeger@de.ibm.com, qemu-s390x@nongnu.org, svens@linux.ibm.com, pbonzini@redhat.com, mihajlov@linux.ibm.com, rth@twiddle.net Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" On 7/23/20 2:26 AM, Cornelia Huck wrote: > On Tue, 21 Jul 2020 14:40:14 -0400 > Collin Walling wrote: > >> On 7/21/20 4:41 AM, David Hildenbrand wrote: > >>> The options I would support are >>> >>> 1. "sccb_boundary_is_valid" which returns "true" if valid >>> 2. "sccb_boundary_is_invalid" which returns "true" if invalid >>> 3. "sccb_boundary_validate" which returns "0" if valid and -EINVAL if not. >>> >>> Which makes reading this code a bit easier. >>> > > Of these, I like option 1 best. > >> >> Sounds good. I'll takes this into consideration for the next round. (I >> may wait just a little longer for that to allow more reviews to come in >> from whoever has the time, if that's okay.) > > We have to wait for (a) QEMU to do a release and (b) the Linux changes > to merge upstream anyway, so we're not in a hurry :) > > As said before, it already looked good from my side, but the suggested > changes are fine with me as well. > > Okay, thanks for the info. I do want to send out a v5 of these patches. While working with someone who is implementing the kernel support for the extended-length SCCB, we found some snags. I'll highlight these changes/fixes in the respective patches on the next version. Thanks! -- Regards, Collin Stay safe and stay healthy