On 01.03.2018 13:08, David Hildenbrand wrote: > Let's also put the 31-bit hack in front of the REAL MMU, otherwise right > now we get errors when loading a PSW where the highest bit is set (e.g. > via s390-netboot.img). The highest bit is not masked away, therefore we > inject addressing exceptions into the guest. > > The proper fix will later be to do all address wrapping before accessing > the MMU - so we won't get any "wrong" entries in there (which makes > flushing also easier). But that will require more work (wrapping in > load_psw, wrapping when incrementing the PC, wrapping every memory > access). > > This fixes the tests/pxe-test test. > > Signed-off-by: David Hildenbrand <[email protected]> > --- > target/s390x/excp_helper.c | 4 ++++ > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/target/s390x/excp_helper.c b/target/s390x/excp_helper.c > index 411051edc3..dfee221111 100644 > --- a/target/s390x/excp_helper.c > +++ b/target/s390x/excp_helper.c > @@ -107,6 +107,10 @@ int s390_cpu_handle_mmu_fault(CPUState *cs, vaddr > orig_vaddr, int size, > return 1; > } > } else if (mmu_idx == MMU_REAL_IDX) { > + /* 31-Bit mode */ > + if (!(env->psw.mask & PSW_MASK_64)) { > + vaddr &= 0x7fffffff; > + }
Since the preceeding if-statement has exactly the same check, I think you could also merge the two checks by putting that in front of the if-statement instead? Apart from that, patch looks good to me. Thomas
