On Wed, 21 Oct 2020 09:43:44 -0400 Janosch Frank <fran...@linux.ibm.com> wrote:
> The SCLP boundary cross check is done by the Ultravisor for a > protected guest, hence we don't need to do it. As QEMU doesn't get a > valid SCCB address in protected mode this is even problematic and can > lead to QEMU reporting a false boundary cross error. > > Signed-off-by: Janosch Frank <fran...@linux.ibm.com> > Reported-by: Marc Hartmayer <mhart...@linux.ibm.com> > Fixes: db13387ca0 ("s390/sclp: rework sclp boundary checks") > Reviewed-by: Christian Borntraeger <borntrae...@de.ibm.com> > Tested-by: Marc Hartmayer <mhart...@linux.ibm.com> Acked-by: Halil Pasic <pa...@linux.ibm.com> > --- > hw/s390x/sclp.c | 5 ----- > 1 file changed, 5 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/hw/s390x/sclp.c b/hw/s390x/sclp.c > index 00f1e4648d..0cf2290826 100644 > --- a/hw/s390x/sclp.c > +++ b/hw/s390x/sclp.c > @@ -285,11 +285,6 @@ int sclp_service_call_protected(CPUS390XState *env, > uint64_t sccb, > goto out_write; > } > > - if (!sccb_verify_boundary(sccb, be16_to_cpu(work_sccb->h.length), code)) > { > - work_sccb->h.response_code = > cpu_to_be16(SCLP_RC_SCCB_BOUNDARY_VIOLATION); > - goto out_write; > - } > - > sclp_c->execute(sclp, work_sccb, code); > out_write: > s390_cpu_pv_mem_write(env_archcpu(env), 0, work_sccb,