>> #include "hw/s390x/s390-pci-bus.h"
>> @@ -1008,17 +1009,25 @@ static int reg_ioat(CPUS390XState *env,
>> S390PCIBusDevice *pbdev, ZpciFib fib,
>> }
>> /* currently we only support designation type 1 with translation */
>> - if (!(dt == ZPCI_IOTA_RTTO && t)) {
>> + if (t && !(dt == ZPCI_IOTA_RTTO)) {
>
> While you're at it, you could change that "!(dt == ZPCI_IOTA_RTTO)" into
> "dt != ZPCI_IOTA_RTTO".
>
ACK
>> error_report("unsupported ioat dt %d t %d", dt, t);
>> s390_program_interrupt(env, PGM_OPERAND, ra);
>> return -EINVAL;
>> + } else if (!t && !pbdev->rtr_allowed) {
>> + error_report("relaxed translation not allowed");
>
> Not sure, but maybe better use qemu_log_mask(LOG_GUEST_ERROR, ...) instead?
>
Hrm, this one I'm not so sure. If I force this path and we give back the
operand exception to the guest, the guest kernel is going to panic as a result.
We are very much in a "that wasn't ever supposed to happen" path, just like
the unsupported dt above, because we already reported what we do (not) support
via CLP.
I just tried to force the path with default settings + the above change, and I
don't see anything in the qemu log from qemu_log_mask(LOG_GUEST_ERROR, ...) but
I do with error_report. Given the unlikely scenario that we reach this path
and the potential ramifications, I think I'd rather leave it as error_report
unless you've got a strong opinion on it!
Thanks,
Matt
