[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH 11/15] RFC: s390x: Exit on vcpu reset error

From: David Hildenbrand
Subject: Re: [PATCH 11/15] RFC: s390x: Exit on vcpu reset error
Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2019 13:22:17 +0100
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.1.1

On 21.11.19 13:19, Janosch Frank wrote:
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 <address@hidden>
   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);
       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 <address@hidden>

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

I' keep it separated.



David / dhildenb

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]