On 24/06/2020 09.52, Janosch Frank wrote:
The component entries written by zipl contain short PSWs, not
addresses. Let's mask them and only pass the address part to
jump_to_IPL_code(uint64_t address) because it expects an address as
visible by the name of the argument.
Signed-off-by: Janosch Frank <[email protected]>
---
pc-bios/s390-ccw/bootmap.c | 5 +++--
pc-bios/s390-ccw/bootmap.h | 2 +-
2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/pc-bios/s390-ccw/bootmap.c b/pc-bios/s390-ccw/bootmap.c
index 97205674e5..8547a140df 100644
--- a/pc-bios/s390-ccw/bootmap.c
+++ b/pc-bios/s390-ccw/bootmap.c
@@ -10,6 +10,7 @@
#include "libc.h"
#include "s390-ccw.h"
+#include "s390-arch.h"
#include "bootmap.h"
#include "virtio.h"
#include "bswap.h"
@@ -436,7 +437,7 @@ static void zipl_load_segment(ComponentEntry *entry)
char *blk_no = &err_msg[30]; /* where to print blockno in (those ZZs) */
blockno = entry->data.blockno;
- address = entry->load_address;
+ address = entry->psw & PSW_MASK_SHORT_ADDR;
Are you really sure about this one here? The address does not seem to be
used for any of the jump_to_IPL() functions. And in the zipl sources, I
can also see spots like this:
entry->compdat.load_address = data.load_address;
... without any further short mask bits. So I somehow doubt that this
change is really ok?
debug_print_int("loading segment at block", blockno);
debug_print_int("addr", address);
@@ -514,7 +515,7 @@ static void zipl_run(ScsiBlockPtr *pte)
IPL_assert(entry->component_type == ZIPL_COMP_ENTRY_EXEC, "No EXEC
entry");
/* should not return */
- jump_to_IPL_code(entry->load_address);
+ jump_to_IPL_code(entry->psw & PSW_MASK_SHORT_ADDR);
That one should be fine, I think.
}
static void ipl_scsi(void)
diff --git a/pc-bios/s390-ccw/bootmap.h b/pc-bios/s390-ccw/bootmap.h
index 12a0166aae..e07f87e690 100644
--- a/pc-bios/s390-ccw/bootmap.h
+++ b/pc-bios/s390-ccw/bootmap.h
@@ -68,7 +68,7 @@ typedef struct ComponentEntry {
ScsiBlockPtr data;
uint8_t pad[7];
uint8_t component_type;
- uint64_t load_address;
+ uint64_t psw;
I'd recommend to keep the load_address name. It's the same name as used
in the zipl sources, and as far as I can see, the field does not always
contain a PSW.
} __attribute((packed)) ComponentEntry;
typedef struct ComponentHeader {
Thomas
