[Top][All Lists]

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

[PULL 1/2] s390x/protvirt: allow to IPL secure guests with -no-reboot

From: Cornelia Huck
Subject: [PULL 1/2] s390x/protvirt: allow to IPL secure guests with -no-reboot
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2020 16:05:21 +0200

From: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>

Right now, -no-reboot prevents secure guests from running. This is
correct from an implementation point of view, as we have modeled the
transition from non-secure to secure as a program directed IPL. From
a user perspective, this is not the behavior of least surprise.

We should implement the IPL into protected mode similar to the
functions that we use for kdump/kexec. In other words, we do not stop
here when -no-reboot is specified on the command line. Like function 0
or function 1, function 10 is not a classic reboot. For example, it
can only be called once. Before calling it a second time, a real
reboot/reset must happen in-between. So function code 10 is more or
less a state transition reset, but not a "standard" reset or reboot.

Fixes: 4d226deafc44 ("s390x: protvirt: Support unpack facility")
Signed-off-by: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>
Reviewed-by: Janosch Frank <frankja@linux.ibm.com>
Reviewed-by: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
Acked-by: Viktor Mihajlovski <mihajlov@linux.ibm.com>
Message-Id: <20200721103202.30610-1-borntraeger@de.ibm.com>
[CH: tweaked description]
Signed-off-by: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>
 hw/s390x/ipl.c | 3 ++-
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/hw/s390x/ipl.c b/hw/s390x/ipl.c
index d46b1f094f75..3d2652d75abd 100644
--- a/hw/s390x/ipl.c
+++ b/hw/s390x/ipl.c
@@ -630,7 +630,8 @@ void s390_ipl_reset_request(CPUState *cs, enum s390_reset 
     if (reset_type == S390_RESET_MODIFIED_CLEAR ||
-        reset_type == S390_RESET_LOAD_NORMAL) {
+        reset_type == S390_RESET_LOAD_NORMAL ||
+        reset_type == S390_RESET_PV) {
         /* ignore -no-reboot, send no event  */
     } else {

reply via email to

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