From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/12] s390/css: expose the AIV facility
Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2018 18:54:00 +0100
Message-ID: <20180118185400.34533a23.cohuck@redhat.com>
References: <20180116200217.211897-1-borntraeger@de.ibm.com>
        <20180116200217.211897-6-borntraeger@de.ibm.com>
        <29f77b94-a5e1-178d-2364-9dcf77dc9096@redhat.com>
        <dbfae6e1-ceda-880c-3908-b03193c7d714@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
        Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>,
        KVM <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-s390 <linux-s390@vger.kernel.org>,
        Janosch Frank <frankja@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Michael Mueller <mimu@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Return-path: <kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:52256 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com"
        rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
        id S932103AbeARRyI (ORCPT <rfc822;kvm@vger.kernel.org>);
        Thu, 18 Jan 2018 12:54:08 -0500
In-Reply-To: <dbfae6e1-ceda-880c-3908-b03193c7d714@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <kvm.vger.kernel.org>

On Thu, 18 Jan 2018 13:02:45 +0100
Michael Mueller <mimu@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:

> On 17.01.18 16:19, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> > On 16.01.2018 21:02, Christian Borntraeger wrote:  
> >> From: Michael Mueller <mimu@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> >>
> >> The patch exposes the Adapter Interruption Virtualization facility (AIV)
> >> of the general channel subsystem characteristics.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Michael Mueller <mimu@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> >> Reviewed-by: Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> >> Reviewed-by: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>
> >> Signed-off-by: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>
> >> ---
> >>   arch/s390/include/asm/css_chars.h | 4 +++-
> >>   1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/arch/s390/include/asm/css_chars.h b/arch/s390/include/asm/css_chars.h
> >> index a478eb61aaf7..fb56fa3283a2 100644
> >> --- a/arch/s390/include/asm/css_chars.h
> >> +++ b/arch/s390/include/asm/css_chars.h
> >> @@ -20,7 +20,9 @@ struct css_general_char {
> >>   	u32 aif_tdd : 1; /* bit 56 */
> >>   	u32 : 1;
> >>   	u32 qebsm : 1;	 /* bit 58 */
> >> -	u32 : 8;
> >> +	u32 : 2;
> >> +	u32 aiv : 1;     /* bit 61 */
> >> +	u32 : 5;
> >>   	u32 aif_osa : 1; /* bit 67 */
> >>   	u32 : 12;
> >>   	u32 eadm_rf : 1; /* bit 80 */
> >>  
> > "Expose" sounds like actually forwarding something / enabling a bit.  
> Expose here basically means to make sth. visible what was already available.
> > Wonder if this can be squashed with another patch?
> >
> > Or rename to something like "define" ...  
> I don't plan to change anything.

I'd prefer to simply squash this with the next patch, where the bit is
actually checked.