qemu-s390x
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH 07/18] pc-bios/s390-ccw: Remove panics from ISO IPL path


From: Thomas Huth
Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/18] pc-bios/s390-ccw: Remove panics from ISO IPL path
Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2024 17:02:16 +0200
User-agent: Mozilla Thunderbird

On 27/09/2024 02.51, jrossi@linux.ibm.com wrote:
From: Jared Rossi <jrossi@linux.ibm.com>

Remove panic-on-error from IPL ISO El Torito specific functions so that error
recovery may be possible in the future.

Functions that would previously panic now provide a return code.

Signed-off-by: Jared Rossi <jrossi@linux.ibm.com>

---
  pc-bios/s390-ccw/bootmap.h  | 17 +++++++---
  pc-bios/s390-ccw/s390-ccw.h |  1 +
  pc-bios/s390-ccw/bootmap.c  | 64 ++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------
  3 files changed, 55 insertions(+), 27 deletions(-)

diff --git a/pc-bios/s390-ccw/bootmap.h b/pc-bios/s390-ccw/bootmap.h
index bbe2c132aa..cb5346829b 100644
--- a/pc-bios/s390-ccw/bootmap.h
+++ b/pc-bios/s390-ccw/bootmap.h
@@ -385,17 +385,24 @@ static inline uint32_t iso_733_to_u32(uint64_t x)
#define ISO_PRIMARY_VD_SECTOR 16 -static inline void read_iso_sector(uint32_t block_offset, void *buf,
+static inline int read_iso_sector(uint32_t block_offset, void *buf,
                                     const char *errmsg)
  {
-    IPL_assert(virtio_read_many(block_offset, buf, 1) == 0, errmsg);
+    if (virtio_read(block_offset, buf)) {
+        puts(errmsg);
+        return 1;
+    }
+    return 0;
  }
-static inline void read_iso_boot_image(uint32_t block_offset, void *load_addr,
+static inline int read_iso_boot_image(uint32_t block_offset, void *load_addr,
                                         uint32_t blks_to_load)
  {
-    IPL_assert(virtio_read_many(block_offset, load_addr, blks_to_load) == 0,
-               "Failed to read boot image!");
+    if (!virtio_read_many(block_offset, load_addr, blks_to_load)) {

That "!" looks wrong here? Or do I misunderstood the original IPL_assert() condition?

+        puts("Failed to read boot image!");
+        return 1;
+    }
+    return 0;
  }
#define ISO9660_MAX_DIR_DEPTH 8
diff --git a/pc-bios/s390-ccw/s390-ccw.h b/pc-bios/s390-ccw/s390-ccw.h
index 0ed7eb8ade..cbd92f3671 100644
--- a/pc-bios/s390-ccw/s390-ccw.h
+++ b/pc-bios/s390-ccw/s390-ccw.h
@@ -30,6 +30,7 @@ typedef unsigned long long u64;
  #define EIO     1
  #define EBUSY   2
  #define ENODEV  3
+#define EINVAL  4
#ifndef MIN
  #define MIN(a, b) (((a) < (b)) ? (a) : (b))
diff --git a/pc-bios/s390-ccw/bootmap.c b/pc-bios/s390-ccw/bootmap.c
index 414c3f1b47..31cf0f6d97 100644
--- a/pc-bios/s390-ccw/bootmap.c
+++ b/pc-bios/s390-ccw/bootmap.c
@@ -678,8 +678,10 @@ static bool is_iso_bc_entry_compatible(IsoBcSection *s)
      if (s->unused || !s->sector_count) {
          return false;
      }
-    read_iso_sector(bswap32(s->load_rba), magic_sec,
-                    "Failed to read image sector 0");
+    if (read_iso_sector(bswap32(s->load_rba), magic_sec,
+                    "Failed to read image sector 0")) {
+        return false;
+    }
/* Checking bytes 8 - 32 for S390 Linux magic */
      return !memcmp(magic_sec + 8, linux_s390_magic, 24);
@@ -706,14 +708,18 @@ static inline uint32_t iso_get_file_size(uint32_t 
load_rba)
      sec_offset[0] = 0;
while (level >= 0) {
-        IPL_assert(sec_offset[level] <= ISO_SECTOR_SIZE,
-                   "Directory tree structure violation");
+        if (sec_offset[level] > ISO_SECTOR_SIZE) {
+            puts("Directory tree structure violation");
+            return -EIO;
+        }
cur_record = (IsoDirHdr *)(temp + sec_offset[level]); if (sec_offset[level] == 0) {
-            read_iso_sector(sec_loc[level], temp,
-                            "Failed to read ISO directory");
+            if (virtio_read(sec_loc[level], temp)) {
+                puts("Failed to read ISO directory");
+                return -EIO;
+            }

Any reasons for switching from read_iso_sector() directly to virtio_read() here?

Apart from that, patch looks fine for me, thanks for doing this clean-up work!

 Thomas




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]