On Tue, 21 Jul 2020 06:32:02 -0400
Christian Borntraeger <borntrae...@de.ibm.com> wrote:
> Right now -no-reboot does prevent secure execution guests from running.
> This is right from an implementation aspect, 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 secure 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. To call it a 2nd 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 <borntrae...@de.ibm.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 ce21494c08..e312a35133 100644
> --- a/hw/s390x/ipl.c
> +++ b/hw/s390x/ipl.c
> @@ -633,7 +633,8 @@ void s390_ipl_reset_request(CPUState *cs, enum s390_reset
> reset_type)
> }
> }
> 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 */
> qemu_system_reset_request(SHUTDOWN_CAUSE_SUBSYSTEM_RESET);
> } else {
Thanks, queued to s390-fixes.
