From: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>
To: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
Cc: qemu-s390x@nongnu.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org,
Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>,
Richard Henderson <rth@twiddle.net>,
Alexander Graf <agraf@suse.de>, Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v1 for-2.12 1/5] s390x/kvm: factor out build_channel_report_mcic() into cpu.h
Date: Tue, 5 Dec 2017 11:20:01 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20171205112001.2fb7ec1e.cohuck@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <10941b30-4fa9-37e6-7d25-f3423282f5b0@redhat.com>
On Mon, 4 Dec 2017 18:16:15 +0100
David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 04.12.2017 18:03, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> > On Mon, 4 Dec 2017 13:55:01 +0100
> > David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> >> We'll need it later on in two places. Refactor it to just indicate the
> >> valid bit. While at it, introduce a define for the used CR14 bit (we'll
> >
> > s/valid bit/validity bits/
>
> In the PoP they are defined as "validity" (e.g. 11-15)
>
> Vector-register validity (VR)
> External-damage-code validity (EC)
> Floating-point-register validity (FP)
> General-register validity (GR)
> Control-register validity (CR)
>
> So I am not sure if using a slightly different terminology here helps.
I don't know, "validity" seems to be more in line with the doc?
>
> >
> >> also need later on).
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
> >> ---
> >> target/s390x/cpu.h | 20 ++++++++++++++++++++
> >> target/s390x/kvm.c | 25 ++-----------------------
> >> 2 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/target/s390x/cpu.h b/target/s390x/cpu.h
> >> index 9cfbbbac04..4d3e7920f5 100644
> >> --- a/target/s390x/cpu.h
> >> +++ b/target/s390x/cpu.h
> >> @@ -351,6 +351,9 @@ extern const struct VMStateDescription vmstate_s390_cpu;
> >> #define CR0_CPU_TIMER_SC 0x0000000000000400ULL
> >> #define CR0_SERVICE_SC 0x0000000000000200ULL
> >>
> >> +/* Control register 14 bits */
> >> +#define CR14_CHANNEL_REPORT_SC 0x0000000010000000ULL
> >> +
> >> /* MMU */
> >> #define MMU_PRIMARY_IDX 0
> >> #define MMU_SECONDARY_IDX 1
> >> @@ -674,6 +677,23 @@ struct sysib_322 {
> >> #define MCIC_VB_CT 0x0000000000020000ULL
> >> #define MCIC_VB_CC 0x0000000000010000ULL
> >>
> >> +static inline uint64_t s390_build_validity_mcic(void)
> >> +{
> >> + uint64_t mcic;
> >> +
> >> + /* indicate all valid bits (no damage) */
> >
> > s/valid/validity/
>
> dito
dito :)
>
> >
> >> + mcic = MCIC_VB_WP | MCIC_VB_MS | MCIC_VB_PM | MCIC_VB_IA | MCIC_VB_FP |
> >> + MCIC_VB_GR | MCIC_VB_CR | MCIC_VB_ST | MCIC_VB_AR | MCIC_VB_PR |
> >> + MCIC_VB_FC | MCIC_VB_CT | MCIC_VB_CC;
> >> + if (s390_has_feat(S390_FEAT_VECTOR)) {
> >> + mcic |= MCIC_VB_VR;
> >> + }
> >> + if (s390_has_feat(S390_FEAT_GUARDED_STORAGE)) {
> >> + mcic |= MCIC_VB_GS;
> >> + }
> >> + return mcic;
> >> +}
> >> +
> >
> > Not sure why this should go into cpu.h - isn't there a better header
> > for it?
>
> internal.h maybe, but we also have the MCIC_* defines in cpu.h (esp.
> direct above this function :) ). So I guess this is best kept here.
> Opinions?
Let's keep it there for now. It's not like it has to stay there for all
eternity.
>
> >
> >>
> >> /* cpu.c */
> >> int s390_get_clock(uint8_t *tod_high, uint64_t *tod_low);
> >> diff --git a/target/s390x/kvm.c b/target/s390x/kvm.c
> >> index 97c45d5537..9b8b59f2a2 100644
> >> --- a/target/s390x/kvm.c
> >> +++ b/target/s390x/kvm.c
> >> @@ -1852,33 +1852,12 @@ void kvm_s390_io_interrupt(uint16_t subchannel_id,
> >> kvm_s390_floating_interrupt(&irq);
> >> }
> >>
> >> -static uint64_t build_channel_report_mcic(void)
> >> -{
> >> - uint64_t mcic;
> >> -
> >> - /* subclass: indicate channel report pending */
> >> - mcic = MCIC_SC_CP |
> >> - /* subclass modifiers: none */
> >> - /* storage errors: none */
> >
> > I find these additional comments quite useful - can they be preserved
> > in any way?
>
> With the new abstraction ("validity" only) / function name most of them
> don't make sense anymore (esp. to be handled by the caller) in the
> context of this function. All other bits would be special for other
> machine check types we want to inject.
OK, as it seems we have #defines for all bits, I think we can live with
that.
>
> >
> >> - /* validity bits: no damage */
> >> - MCIC_VB_WP | MCIC_VB_MS | MCIC_VB_PM | MCIC_VB_IA | MCIC_VB_FP |
> >> - MCIC_VB_GR | MCIC_VB_CR | MCIC_VB_ST | MCIC_VB_AR | MCIC_VB_PR |
> >> - MCIC_VB_FC | MCIC_VB_CT | MCIC_VB_CC;
> >> - if (s390_has_feat(S390_FEAT_VECTOR)) {
> >> - mcic |= MCIC_VB_VR;
> >> - }
> >> - if (s390_has_feat(S390_FEAT_GUARDED_STORAGE)) {
> >> - mcic |= MCIC_VB_GS;
> >> - }
> >> - return mcic;
> >> -}
>
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-12-05 10:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-12-04 12:55 [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v1 for-2.12 0/5] s390x/tcg: CCW hotplug support David Hildenbrand
2017-12-04 12:55 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v1 for-2.12 1/5] s390x/kvm: factor out build_channel_report_mcic() into cpu.h David Hildenbrand
2017-12-04 17:03 ` Cornelia Huck
2017-12-04 17:16 ` David Hildenbrand
2017-12-05 10:20 ` Cornelia Huck [this message]
2017-12-05 11:29 ` David Hildenbrand
2017-12-04 12:55 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v1 for-2.12 2/5] s390x/tcg: fix and cleanup mcck injection David Hildenbrand
2017-12-04 17:20 ` Cornelia Huck
2017-12-04 17:27 ` David Hildenbrand
2017-12-05 10:14 ` Cornelia Huck
2017-12-05 15:53 ` Thomas Huth
2017-12-05 16:22 ` David Hildenbrand
2017-12-04 12:55 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v1 for-2.12 3/5] s390x/tcg: implement SET CLOCK PROGRAMMABLE FIELD David Hildenbrand
2017-12-05 11:05 ` Cornelia Huck
2017-12-06 15:10 ` Thomas Huth
2017-12-06 15:15 ` David Hildenbrand
2017-12-04 12:55 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v1 for-2.12 4/5] s390x/tcg: indicate value of TODPR in STCKE David Hildenbrand
2017-12-06 15:24 ` Thomas Huth
2017-12-04 12:55 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v1 for-2.12 5/5] s390x/tcg: wire up STORE CHANNEL REPORT WORD David Hildenbrand
2017-12-04 17:22 ` Cornelia Huck
2017-12-04 17:34 ` David Hildenbrand
2017-12-04 17:53 ` Cornelia Huck
2017-12-04 17:56 ` David Hildenbrand
2017-12-04 17:58 ` Cornelia Huck
2017-12-04 18:37 ` David Hildenbrand
2017-12-05 10:04 ` Cornelia Huck
2017-12-06 15:40 ` Thomas Huth
2017-12-04 13:10 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v1 for-2.12 0/5] s390x/tcg: CCW hotplug support no-reply
2017-12-04 13:21 ` David Hildenbrand
2017-12-04 13:35 ` no-reply
2017-12-04 16:56 ` Cornelia Huck
2017-12-04 17:00 ` David Hildenbrand
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20171205112001.2fb7ec1e.cohuck@redhat.com \
--to=cohuck@redhat.com \
--cc=agraf@suse.de \
--cc=borntraeger@de.ibm.com \
--cc=david@redhat.com \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=qemu-s390x@nongnu.org \
--cc=rth@twiddle.net \
--cc=thuth@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.