On 02/22/2018 10:44 AM, Christian Borntraeger wrote:

On 02/22/2018 04:40 PM, Collin L. Walling wrote:
On 02/22/2018 07:23 AM, Viktor Mihajlovski wrote:
On 22.02.2018 12:51, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
Acked-by: Christian Borntraeger <borntrae...@de.ibm.com>

menu on scsi and dasd bootmaps tested successfully.

There is one thing that we might want to fix (can be an addon patch since this 
is a non-customer
scenario (no libvirt)).

If you start QEMU manually without a bootindex, the -boot menu=on is ignored
if no drive has a bootindex.

For example:

-drive file=/dev/dasda,if=none,id=d1 -device 
virtio-blk-ccw,drive=d1,bootindex=1 -boot menu=on
does work

-drive file=/dev/dasda -boot menu=on
does not

instead it prints:
qemu-system-s390x: boot menu is not supported for this device type.

and the boots up the default entry.

That should indeed be a separate patch, as it would move logic currently
in the BIOS up to QEMU (find the first defined virtio disk and select it
as boot disk).
In fact it's more complicated than that, because it would have to
properly account for -boot order=[acdn] and produce the respective IPLB.
While it makes sense, I wouldn't rush that in but rather change the
error message to indicate that -device bootindex is needed to activate
the menu, at least for the time being.

I can look into it.  Theoretically, the easier fix should just involve parsing 
of the -device commands and looking for a "bootindex=1" field. The Qemu options
code already handles a bulk of this work, so it's just a matter of putting it 

Shall I whip something up and post what I have as a reply to this email chain?
In fact, it should already be there.

static bool s390_gen_initial_iplb(S390IPLState *ipl)
     DeviceState *dev_st;

     dev_st = get_boot_device(0);

--> if this returns 0 we have no bootindex statement anywhere and the BIOS will 
IPL the default

Makes sense.  I'm working on making this patch look as clean as possible. The fact that no boot menu options present means we fallback to using zipl values for CCW being tied into the switch statement is making things a bit tricky. Just have to think the logic through a bit.  Will get back to you once
I have something good.

- Collin L Walling

Reply via email to