From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from lists1p.gnu.org (lists1p.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AD08FC5DF97 for ; Wed, 26 Aug 2026 14:41:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists1p.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1wzEo7-0006mK-Vm; Wed, 26 Aug 2026 10:40:52 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists1p.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1wzEo6-0006kx-9y; Wed, 26 Aug 2026 10:40:50 -0400 Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.156.1]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1wzEo4-0005pf-Bz; Wed, 26 Aug 2026 10:40:50 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (m0356517.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.18.1.11/8.18.1.11) with ESMTP id 67QE1WY8015904; Wed, 26 Aug 2026 14:40:45 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ibm.com; h= content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to; s=pp1; bh=G+dIBf ygeYzSuz1SjFE7VEIiF2gnK4f1B/17344b36A=; b=AQrXxdX9XXFzb0Jo++mPAq OhBzLGQxiGh5VmIdR3qUoPpYdK/JsV00gifnjtiLq5wHccQ7im46HT+erNIWWnd2 eiF3SNNfpOFT87T6PiYQNyT1uIlLuUXYJHaYoUnrgAhN5MX7pzezfz7AbucVIH85 Fv/GneB544gh7NgH2B9BvR2Ja/Yf9CPY2NCWyyUfKR7wz0AoIX2Q83I2hpbiXEdk PWfJHgQQIyJrkQgx9JqsHetBig6INlsSDp9sSxsDTZiE0d6+Kl1a7CtJFlcPR9rt qU/zKy+yLbTch6j4yWobRONZLuhzhCCq8YkGi8b0IIOZ4UeOBdVsdPYO5jeGw0yw == Received: from ppma13.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (dd.9e.1632.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [50.22.158.221]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 4g73g4yabx-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 26 Aug 2026 14:40:45 +0000 (GMT) Received: from pps.filterd (ppma13.dal12v.mail.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma13.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (8.18.1.7/8.18.1.7) with ESMTP id 67QEQNH9026463; Wed, 26 Aug 2026 14:40:44 GMT Received: from smtprelay04.dal12v.mail.ibm.com ([172.16.1.6]) by ppma13.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 4g7ragjajv-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 26 Aug 2026 14:40:44 +0000 (GMT) Received: from smtpav04.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (smtpav04.dal12v.mail.ibm.com [10.241.53.103]) by smtprelay04.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 67QEehWZ31523514 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 26 Aug 2026 14:40:43 GMT Received: from smtpav04.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id D1EFC5805E; Wed, 26 Aug 2026 14:40:43 +0000 (GMT) Received: from smtpav04.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F28858056; Wed, 26 Aug 2026 14:40:43 +0000 (GMT) Received: from [9.61.69.254] (unknown [9.61.69.254]) by smtpav04.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Wed, 26 Aug 2026 14:40:43 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: <4e88884a-ce31-4d32-8941-5922fc3c596a@linux.ibm.com> Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2026 10:40:42 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/8] hw/s390x/ipl: Fix incorrect PCI IPL block length constant To: Matthew Rosato , Zhuoying Cai , Eric Farman , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, qemu-s390x@nongnu.org, cohuck@redhat.com, "Jason J . Herne" References: <20260811144629.866641-1-jrossi@linux.ibm.com> <20260811144629.866641-3-jrossi@linux.ibm.com> <51730ac3-ff1f-4eca-98f9-b31b47596185@linux.ibm.com> <1bf6e2a3-be53-47b3-8694-9b249770a655@linux.ibm.com> <0ba0a7aa-623a-48e3-bde9-48ee82331d1a@linux.ibm.com> <36b43f47-32d7-4ff0-ad76-2d1ab1df2c7f@linux.ibm.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Jared Rossi In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: xJq32oSWXMIEvjOX8JXevPtbBcR8fa4U X-Proofpoint-Spam-Info: AW1haW4tMjYwODI2MDEyMSBTYWx0ZWRfX6olsDsYxqyiy htztFpON+/TbwDsIbM+iBQLdcGN2IDFOFa2puF9Z+mBwhqQYQXjl6Uf51AU5/Bdpo9yLIFCDXWA B/pLZAOzYF/1vDLni+HEH7JK4gUP0aw= X-Proofpoint-GUID: xJq32oSWXMIEvjOX8JXevPtbBcR8fa4U X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.4 cv=JZyMa0KV c=1 sm=1 tr=0 ts=6a8efaed cx=c_pps a=AfN7/Ok6k8XGzOShvHwTGQ==:117 a=AfN7/Ok6k8XGzOShvHwTGQ==:17 a=IkcTkHD0fZMA:10 a=Sv0fKeRqtYgA:10 a=VkNPw1HP01LnGYTKEx00:22 a=RnoormkPH1_aCDwRdu11:22 a=U7nrCbtTmkRpXpFmAIza:22 a=clF9_pQHt9C7tqTUgR0A:9 a=3ZKOabzyN94A:10 a=QEXdDO2ut3YA:10 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details-Enc: AW1haW4tMjYwODI2MDEyMSBTYWx0ZWRfX130ubPhInr5P 1aKfHEXFG6B4O5h+8V865bHUW3BuFhqg6MYgDkhsGUi8aZJyR0Huc+laDOFekTAycYufRFNkpGi QpqECljfVp9dppxLfRcJ9wZIlJwq8UbPvHASkx4QYDlGmeEAQhxeerrs7Y10WnGTLJRXJFtnaP3 lzqTKygfRhLt1pvXlUWhEWmtoJyOj7+KkXI8lj415oZXqP2CAU0cR8nWSYbLPEuCugAFfSONqbd iqx9KaD2zuSVYNUxvtSYmdh6yq/luul+j0puC1XeVq6RyxeYYDxuyC8y0Od0I8j5byZ/HBwGjDr XT5JU3IS9TAPDa1S4EuAtr89kkcHrhneWguJdQSBgLCV3a5vUJoHjRDG5BBpp0aWkGtCQnt9ZLh rEDrzK0myzWebBkXOUfEv8HrPPeZj3A1Dol8J1Mb53wL31rk5mSI29Ych+Yc5biPyJWF7dNHcvS E+TRGUJq0iYxfxX9CXQ== X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.293,Aquarius:18.0.1176,Hydra:6.1.134,FMLib:17.12.100.49 definitions=2026-08-26_04,2026-08-26_02,2025-10-01_01 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 adultscore=0 priorityscore=1501 impostorscore=0 malwarescore=0 bulkscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 classifier=typeunknown authscore=0 authtc= authcc= route=outbound adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.22.0-2606150000 definitions=main-2608260121 Received-SPF: pass client-ip=148.163.156.1; envelope-from=jrossi@linux.ibm.com; helo=mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com X-Spam_score_int: -26 X-Spam_score: -2.7 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.7 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: qemu development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org On 8/25/26 3:26 PM, Matthew Rosato wrote: >>>> Given that, should the #define be sizeof(IplBlockPci) + 24? >>>> >>> If IplBlockPci is likely to expand in the future, it might make sense to >>> derive this value from the structure layout. For example, >>> offsetof(IplParameterBlock, pci) + sizeof(IplBlockPci) could be more >>> accurate. Otherwise, keeping it as a constant like the other definitions >>> seems reasonable as well. >> All of those suggestions would be valid, but I'm leaning toward keeping it >> defined without using sizeof() for the sake of consistency if nothing >> else.  The other IPLB types are already defined as fixed numbers and for >> the IplBlockQemuScsi being used later in this patch series, it actually has >> a minimum value that is less than the sizeof() itself due to the same >> struct >> servicing both PCI and CCW controllers, where the minimum size for CCW is >> less than PCI. >> >> I can envision several ways to improve the definitions and/or naming >> conventions, but I think it is outside the scope of this series because the >> changes should be uniformly applied to all definitions, not just PCI. > Ehh... If you already think the other definitions should be fixed then > convention is not a good enough reason to propagate the bad practice to > new code. Doing the new definition the right way now in this patch is > certainly within the scope of this series. > > If we have structures that define the entire 336 bytes, I personally > would much prefer to see that written out with sizeof()s vs a magic > number that coincidentally must line up with the size of one or more > well-defined structures. > > As for existing definitions, I agree that is out of scope: you could > follow-up later with one or more patches that cleanup the existing > definitions. > > Thanks, > Matt OK.  I will use offsetof(IplParameterBlock, pci) + sizeof(IplBlockPci) for the new definition, with the intention of cleanly splitting the IPLB header from Block0 and uniformly updating the definitions in a follow-up series later. Regards, Jared Rossi