Am 28.06.24 um 17:22 schrieb Claudio Imbrenda:
On Fri, 28 Jun 2024 16:53:20 +0200
Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Am 27.06.24 um 11:57 schrieb Heiko Carstens:
On Thu, Jun 27, 2024 at 11:05:20AM +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
in rare cases, e.g. for injecting a machine check we do intercept all
load PSW instructions via ICTL_LPSW. With facility 193 a new variant
LPSWEY was added. KVM needs to handle that as well.
Fixes: a3efa8429266 ("KVM: s390: gen_facilities: allow facilities 165, 193, 194 and 196")
Reported-by: Marc Hartmayer <mhartmay@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h | 1 +
arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c | 1 +
arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.h | 16 ++++++++++++++++
arch/s390/kvm/priv.c | 32 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
4 files changed, 50 insertions(+)
...
+static inline u64 kvm_s390_get_base_disp_siy(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u8 *ar)
+{
+ u32 base1 = vcpu->arch.sie_block->ipb >> 28;
+ u32 disp1 = ((vcpu->arch.sie_block->ipb & 0x0fff0000) >> 16) +
long disp1 = ...
+ ((vcpu->arch.sie_block->ipb & 0xff00) << 4);
+
+ /* The displacement is a 20bit _SIGNED_ value */
+ if (disp1 & 0x80000)
+ disp1+=0xfff00000;
disp1 = sign_extend64(disp1, 20);
Hmm, right. I was just looking at the return statement, but here it is clearly better.
Will send a v2
