On 22.10.20 11:54, Halil Pasic wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Oct 2020 04:23:12 -0400
> Janosch Frank <fran...@linux.ibm.com> wrote:
>
>> Diag318 fencing needs to be determined on the current VM PV state and
>> not on the state that the VM has when we create the CPU model.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Janosch Frank <fran...@linux.ibm.com>
>> Reported-by: Marc Hartmayer <mhart...@linux.ibm.com>
>> Reviewed-by: Christian Borntraeger <borntrae...@de.ibm.com>
>> Fixes: fabdada935 ("s390: guest support for diagnose 0x318")
>> ---
>>
>> If you're sure that this is what you want, then I'll send a v2 of the
>> patch set.
>>
>> ---
>> target/s390x/cpu_features.c | 5 +++++
>> target/s390x/cpu_features.h | 4 ++++
>> target/s390x/cpu_models.c | 4 ++++
>> target/s390x/kvm.c | 3 +--
>> 4 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/target/s390x/cpu_features.c b/target/s390x/cpu_features.c
>> index 31ea8df246..42fe0bf4ca 100644
>> --- a/target/s390x/cpu_features.c
>> +++ b/target/s390x/cpu_features.c
>> @@ -14,6 +14,7 @@
>> #include "qemu/osdep.h"
>> #include "qemu/module.h"
>> #include "cpu_features.h"
>> +#include "hw/s390x/pv.h"
>>
>> #define DEF_FEAT(_FEAT, _NAME, _TYPE, _BIT, _DESC) \
>> [S390_FEAT_##_FEAT] = { \
>> @@ -105,6 +106,10 @@ void s390_fill_feat_block(const S390FeatBitmap
>> features, S390FeatType type,
>> }
>> feat = find_next_bit(features, S390_FEAT_MAX, feat + 1);
>> }
>> +
>> + if (type == S390_FEAT_TYPE_SCLP_FAC134 && s390_is_pv()) {
>> + clear_be_bit(s390_feat_def(S390_FEAT_DIAG_318)->bit, data);
>> + }
>> }
>
> Sorry, I'm a little rusty with cpu models. Does this affect the outcome
> of the corresponding QMP commands?
>
> I would guess it does...
No, it shouldn't.
--
Thanks,
David / dhildenb
