From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Cornelia Huck Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/6] KVM: s390: fix sigp sense running condition code handling Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2012 17:33:44 +0200 Message-ID: <20120626173344.6e3d6a01@BR9GNB5Z> References: <1340719601-11867-1-git-send-email-cornelia.huck@de.ibm.com> <1340719601-11867-4-git-send-email-cornelia.huck@de.ibm.com> <06A9A05A-0EF3-4ACF-8254-1F3F10844793@suse.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <06A9A05A-0EF3-4ACF-8254-1F3F10844793@suse.de> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Archive: List-Post: To: Alexander Graf Cc: Avi Kivity , Marcelo Tosatti , Christian Borntraeger , Carsten Otte , Heiko Carstens , Martin Schwidefsky , KVM , linux-s390 List-ID: On Tue, 26 Jun 2012 16:52:56 +0200 Alexander Graf wrote: > > On 26.06.2012, at 16:06, Cornelia Huck wrote: > > > From: Heiko Carstens > > > > Only if the sensed cpu is not running a status is stored, which > > is reflected by condition code 1. If the cpu is running, condition > > code 0 should be returned. > > Just the opposite of what the code is doing. > > > > Acked-by: Cornelia Huck > > Signed-off-by: Heiko Carstens > > Signed-off-by: Cornelia Huck > > Yikes. Is this a stable candidate? This code will only hit when running on a host running virtualized itself (where sigp sense running will cause an intercept), so I doubt many people will see the effects. Cornelia