----- Original Message -----
> From: "David Gibson" <da...@gibson.dropbear.id.au>
> To: mdr...@linux.vnet.ibm.com, th...@redhat.com, lviv...@redhat.com
> Cc: pbonz...@redhat.com, qemu-...@nongnu.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, "David
> Gibson" <da...@gibson.dropbear.id.au>
> Sent: Wednesday, June 7, 2017 9:07:32 AM
> Subject: [PATCH] pseries: Correct panic behaviour for pseries machine type
>
> The pseries machine type doesn't usually use the 'pvpanic' device as such,
> because it has a firmware/hypervisor facility with roughly the same
> purpose. The 'ibm,os-term' RTAS call notifies the hypervisor that the
> guest has crashed.
>
> Our implementation of this call was sending a GUEST_PANICKED qmp event;
> however, it was not doing the other usual panic actions, making its
> behaviour different from pvpanic for no good reason.
>
> To correct this, we should call qemu_system_guest_panicked() rather than
> directly sending the panic event.
>
> Signed-off-by: David Gibson <da...@gibson.dropbear.id.au>
> ---
> hw/ppc/spapr_rtas.c | 7 ++-----
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/hw/ppc/spapr_rtas.c b/hw/ppc/spapr_rtas.c
> index 707c4d4..94a2799 100644
> --- a/hw/ppc/spapr_rtas.c
> +++ b/hw/ppc/spapr_rtas.c
> @@ -293,12 +293,9 @@ static void rtas_ibm_os_term(PowerPCCPU *cpu,
> target_ulong args,
> uint32_t nret, target_ulong rets)
> {
> - target_ulong ret = 0;
> + qemu_system_guest_panicked(NULL);
>
> - qapi_event_send_guest_panicked(GUEST_PANIC_ACTION_PAUSE, false, NULL,
> - &error_abort);
> -
> - rtas_st(rets, 0, ret);
> + rtas_st(rets, 0, RTAS_OUT_SUCCESS);
> }
It's possible to "cont" a panicked guest, so I think you should keep
the rtas_st.
Paolo
