| Message ID | 20200505152926.18877-10-armbru@redhat.com |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
| Series | qom: Spring cleaning | expand |
On Tue, 5 May 2020 17:29:17 +0200 Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com> wrote: > Both s390_features[S390_FEAT_PCC_CMAC_AES_256].name and > s390_features[S390_FEAT_PCC_CMAC_EAES_256].name is > "pcc-cmac-eaes-256". The former is obviously a pasto. > > Impact: > > * s390_feat_bitmap_to_ascii() misidentifies S390_FEAT_PCC_CMAC_AES_256 > as "pcc-cmac-eaes-256". Affects QMP commands query-cpu-definitions, > query-cpu-model-expansion, query-cpu-model-baseline, > query-cpu-model-comparison, and the error message when > s390_realize_cpu_model() fails in check_compatibility(). > > * s390_cpu_list() also misidentifies it. Affects -cpu help. > > * s390_cpu_model_register_props() creates CPU property > "pcc-cmac-eaes-256" twice. The second one fails, but the error is > ignored (a later commit will change that). Results in a single > property "pcc-cmac-eaes-256" with the description for > S390_FEAT_PCC_CMAC_AES_256, and no property for > S390_FEAT_PCC_CMAC_EAES_256. CPU properties are visible in CLI -cpu > and -device, QMP & HMP device_add, QMP device-list-properties, and > QOM introspection. > > Fix by deleting the wayward 'e'. > > Fixes: 782417446279717aa85320191a519b51f6d5dd31 I like the more standard Fixes: 782417446279 ("s390x/cpumodel: introduce CPU features") for that. > Cc: Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com> > Cc: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com> > Cc: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com> > Cc: Richard Henderson <rth@twiddle.net> > Cc: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com> > Cc: qemu-s390x@nongnu.org > Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com> > Reviewed-by: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com> > Tested-by: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com> > --- > target/s390x/cpu_features_def.inc.h | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) Reviewed-by: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com> I assume you'll take this one together with the rest of the series?
On 05.05.20 17:29, Markus Armbruster wrote: > Both s390_features[S390_FEAT_PCC_CMAC_AES_256].name and > s390_features[S390_FEAT_PCC_CMAC_EAES_256].name is > "pcc-cmac-eaes-256". The former is obviously a pasto. > > Impact: > > * s390_feat_bitmap_to_ascii() misidentifies S390_FEAT_PCC_CMAC_AES_256 > as "pcc-cmac-eaes-256". Affects QMP commands query-cpu-definitions, > query-cpu-model-expansion, query-cpu-model-baseline, > query-cpu-model-comparison, and the error message when > s390_realize_cpu_model() fails in check_compatibility(). > > * s390_cpu_list() also misidentifies it. Affects -cpu help. > > * s390_cpu_model_register_props() creates CPU property > "pcc-cmac-eaes-256" twice. The second one fails, but the error is > ignored (a later commit will change that). Results in a single > property "pcc-cmac-eaes-256" with the description for > S390_FEAT_PCC_CMAC_AES_256, and no property for > S390_FEAT_PCC_CMAC_EAES_256. CPU properties are visible in CLI -cpu > and -device, QMP & HMP device_add, QMP device-list-properties, and > QOM introspection. > > Fix by deleting the wayward 'e'. You dropped the comment regarding msa4, was that intended?
David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com> writes: > On 05.05.20 17:29, Markus Armbruster wrote: >> Both s390_features[S390_FEAT_PCC_CMAC_AES_256].name and >> s390_features[S390_FEAT_PCC_CMAC_EAES_256].name is >> "pcc-cmac-eaes-256". The former is obviously a pasto. >> >> Impact: >> >> * s390_feat_bitmap_to_ascii() misidentifies S390_FEAT_PCC_CMAC_AES_256 >> as "pcc-cmac-eaes-256". Affects QMP commands query-cpu-definitions, >> query-cpu-model-expansion, query-cpu-model-baseline, >> query-cpu-model-comparison, and the error message when >> s390_realize_cpu_model() fails in check_compatibility(). >> >> * s390_cpu_list() also misidentifies it. Affects -cpu help. >> >> * s390_cpu_model_register_props() creates CPU property >> "pcc-cmac-eaes-256" twice. The second one fails, but the error is >> ignored (a later commit will change that). Results in a single >> property "pcc-cmac-eaes-256" with the description for >> S390_FEAT_PCC_CMAC_AES_256, and no property for >> S390_FEAT_PCC_CMAC_EAES_256. CPU properties are visible in CLI -cpu >> and -device, QMP & HMP device_add, QMP device-list-properties, and >> QOM introspection. >> >> Fix by deleting the wayward 'e'. > > You dropped the comment regarding msa4, was that intended? Accident, will put it back. Glad you're paying attention!
Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com> writes: > On Tue, 5 May 2020 17:29:17 +0200 > Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com> wrote: > >> Both s390_features[S390_FEAT_PCC_CMAC_AES_256].name and >> s390_features[S390_FEAT_PCC_CMAC_EAES_256].name is >> "pcc-cmac-eaes-256". The former is obviously a pasto. >> >> Impact: >> >> * s390_feat_bitmap_to_ascii() misidentifies S390_FEAT_PCC_CMAC_AES_256 >> as "pcc-cmac-eaes-256". Affects QMP commands query-cpu-definitions, >> query-cpu-model-expansion, query-cpu-model-baseline, >> query-cpu-model-comparison, and the error message when >> s390_realize_cpu_model() fails in check_compatibility(). >> >> * s390_cpu_list() also misidentifies it. Affects -cpu help. >> >> * s390_cpu_model_register_props() creates CPU property >> "pcc-cmac-eaes-256" twice. The second one fails, but the error is >> ignored (a later commit will change that). Results in a single >> property "pcc-cmac-eaes-256" with the description for >> S390_FEAT_PCC_CMAC_AES_256, and no property for >> S390_FEAT_PCC_CMAC_EAES_256. CPU properties are visible in CLI -cpu >> and -device, QMP & HMP device_add, QMP device-list-properties, and >> QOM introspection. >> >> Fix by deleting the wayward 'e'. >> >> Fixes: 782417446279717aa85320191a519b51f6d5dd31 > > I like the more standard > > Fixes: 782417446279 ("s390x/cpumodel: introduce CPU features") > > for that. For a value of "standard" :) $ git-log --since 'one year ago' master | sed -n 's/^ *Fixes: *//p' | sed -E 's/^[a-f0-9]{40}/SHA/i;s/^[a-f0-9]{4,}/ABBREV-SHA/i;s/^https?:[^ ]*/URL/;s/^(Coverity )?CID [^ ]*/CID/;s/^CVE-[^ ]*/CVE/;s/".*"/"MSG"/;s/\(.*\)/(MSG)/'| sort | uniq -c | grep -v '^ *1 ' | sort -nr 204 ABBREV-SHA (MSG) 132 ABBREV-SHA 85 SHA 43 URL 23 ABBREV-SHA "MSG" 11 CID 5 3 CVE 2 add read-zeroes to 051.out 2 CID (MSG) I'll tweak it for you, of course. >> Cc: Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com> >> Cc: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com> >> Cc: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com> >> Cc: Richard Henderson <rth@twiddle.net> >> Cc: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com> >> Cc: qemu-s390x@nongnu.org >> Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com> >> Reviewed-by: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com> >> Tested-by: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com> >> --- >> target/s390x/cpu_features_def.inc.h | 2 +- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > Reviewed-by: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com> > > I assume you'll take this one together with the rest of the series? Yes. Thank you!
diff --git a/target/s390x/cpu_features_def.inc.h b/target/s390x/cpu_features_def.inc.h index 60db28351d..5942f81f16 100644 --- a/target/s390x/cpu_features_def.inc.h +++ b/target/s390x/cpu_features_def.inc.h @@ -311,7 +311,7 @@ DEF_FEAT(PCC_CMAC_ETDEA_192, "pcc-cmac-etdea-128", PCC, 10, "PCC Compute-Last-Bl DEF_FEAT(PCC_CMAC_TDEA, "pcc-cmac-etdea-192", PCC, 11, "PCC Compute-Last-Block-CMAC-Using-EncryptedTDEA-192") DEF_FEAT(PCC_CMAC_AES_128, "pcc-cmac-aes-128", PCC, 18, "PCC Compute-Last-Block-CMAC-Using-AES-128") DEF_FEAT(PCC_CMAC_AES_192, "pcc-cmac-aes-192", PCC, 19, "PCC Compute-Last-Block-CMAC-Using-AES-192") -DEF_FEAT(PCC_CMAC_AES_256, "pcc-cmac-eaes-256", PCC, 20, "PCC Compute-Last-Block-CMAC-Using-AES-256") +DEF_FEAT(PCC_CMAC_AES_256, "pcc-cmac-aes-256", PCC, 20, "PCC Compute-Last-Block-CMAC-Using-AES-256") DEF_FEAT(PCC_CMAC_EAES_128, "pcc-cmac-eaes-128", PCC, 26, "PCC Compute-Last-Block-CMAC-Using-Encrypted-AES-128") DEF_FEAT(PCC_CMAC_EAES_192, "pcc-cmac-eaes-192", PCC, 27, "PCC Compute-Last-Block-CMAC-Using-Encrypted-AES-192") DEF_FEAT(PCC_CMAC_EAES_256, "pcc-cmac-eaes-256", PCC, 28, "PCC Compute-Last-Block-CMAC-Using-Encrypted-AES-256")