David Hildenbrand writes:
> [...]
>
>> 1 "msa4-base": true,
>> 1 "pcc-cmac-aes-256": false,
>> 1 "pcc-cmac-eaes-256": false,
>>
>> The grouping and masking you described appears to apply to
>>
[...]
> 1 "msa4-base": true,
> 1 "pcc-cmac-aes-256": false,
> 1 "pcc-cmac-eaes-256": false,
>
> The grouping and masking you described appears to apply to
> query-cpu-model-expansion with type "static". With type
David Hildenbrand writes:
> On 02.05.20 08:26, Markus Armbruster wrote:
>> David Hildenbrand writes:
>>
>>> On 30.04.20 20:22, Markus Armbruster wrote:
David Hildenbrand writes:
> On 28.04.20 18:34, Markus Armbruster wrote:
>> Both
On 02.05.20 07:15, Markus Armbruster wrote:
> Christian Borntraeger writes:
>
>> On 29.04.20 10:54, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 28.04.20 19:13, David Hildenbrand wrote:
On 28.04.20 18:34, Markus Armbruster wrote:
> Both s390_features[S390_FEAT_PCC_CMAC_AES_256].name
On 02.05.20 08:26, Markus Armbruster wrote:
> David Hildenbrand writes:
>
>> On 30.04.20 20:22, Markus Armbruster wrote:
>>> David Hildenbrand writes:
>>>
On 28.04.20 18:34, Markus Armbruster wrote:
> Both s390_features[S390_FEAT_PCC_CMAC_AES_256].name and
>
David Hildenbrand writes:
> On 30.04.20 20:22, Markus Armbruster wrote:
>> David Hildenbrand writes:
>>
>>> On 28.04.20 18:34, Markus Armbruster wrote:
Both s390_features[S390_FEAT_PCC_CMAC_AES_256].name and
s390_features[S390_FEAT_PCC_CMAC_EAES_256].name is
"pcc-cmac-eaes-256".
Christian Borntraeger writes:
> On 29.04.20 10:54, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 28.04.20 19:13, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>>> On 28.04.20 18:34, Markus Armbruster wrote:
Both s390_features[S390_FEAT_PCC_CMAC_AES_256].name and
s390_features[S390_FEAT_PCC_CMAC_EAES_256].name
On 30.04.20 20:22, Markus Armbruster wrote:
> David Hildenbrand writes:
>
>> On 28.04.20 18:34, Markus Armbruster wrote:
>>> Both s390_features[S390_FEAT_PCC_CMAC_AES_256].name and
>>> s390_features[S390_FEAT_PCC_CMAC_EAES_256].name is
>>> "pcc-cmac-eaes-256". The former is obviously a pasto.
On 29.04.20 10:54, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
>
>
> On 28.04.20 19:13, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>> On 28.04.20 18:34, Markus Armbruster wrote:
>>> Both s390_features[S390_FEAT_PCC_CMAC_AES_256].name and
>>> s390_features[S390_FEAT_PCC_CMAC_EAES_256].name is
>>> "pcc-cmac-eaes-256". The
David Hildenbrand writes:
> On 28.04.20 18:34, Markus Armbruster wrote:
>> Both s390_features[S390_FEAT_PCC_CMAC_AES_256].name and
>> s390_features[S390_FEAT_PCC_CMAC_EAES_256].name is
>> "pcc-cmac-eaes-256". The former is obviously a pasto.
>>
>> Impact:
>>
>> * s390_feat_bitmap_to_ascii()
On 28.04.20 19:13, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 28.04.20 18:34, Markus Armbruster wrote:
>> Both s390_features[S390_FEAT_PCC_CMAC_AES_256].name and
>> s390_features[S390_FEAT_PCC_CMAC_EAES_256].name is
>> "pcc-cmac-eaes-256". The former is obviously a pasto.
>>
>> Impact:
>>
>> *
On 28.04.20 18:34, Markus Armbruster wrote:
> Both s390_features[S390_FEAT_PCC_CMAC_AES_256].name and
> s390_features[S390_FEAT_PCC_CMAC_EAES_256].name is
> "pcc-cmac-eaes-256". The former is obviously a pasto.
>
> Impact:
>
> * s390_feat_bitmap_to_ascii() misidentifies
Both s390_features[S390_FEAT_PCC_CMAC_AES_256].name and
s390_features[S390_FEAT_PCC_CMAC_EAES_256].name is
"pcc-cmac-eaes-256". The former is obviously a pasto.
Impact:
* s390_feat_bitmap_to_ascii() misidentifies S390_FEAT_PCC_CMAC_AES_256
as "pcc-cmac-eaes-256". Affects QMP commands
13 matches
Mail list logo