Re: [PATCH v2 9/9] s390/cio: Combine direct and indirect CCW paths

Eric Farman
2019-06-14T10:30:28Z

On 6/14/19 6:01 AM, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> On Thu, 6 Jun 2019 22:28:31 +0200
> Eric Farman <farman@linux.ibm.com> wrote:
>
>> With both the direct-addressed and indirect-addressed CCW paths
>> simplified to this point, the amount of shared code between them is
>> (hopefully) more easily visible. Move the processing of IDA-specific
>> bits into the direct-addressed path, and add some useful commentary of
>> what the individual pieces are doing. This allows us to remove the
>> entire ccwchain_fetch_idal() routine and maintain a single function
>> for any non-TIC CCW.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Eric Farman <farman@linux.ibm.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/s390/cio/vfio_ccw_cp.c | 115 +++++++++++----------------------
>> 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 76 deletions(-)
>
> Another nice cleanup :)

Thanks! This one makes me feel warm and fuzzy having only CCW processor
to manage in the future.

>
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/s390/cio/vfio_ccw_cp.c b/drivers/s390/cio/vfio_ccw_cp.c
>> index 8205d0b527fc..90d86e1354c1 100644
>> --- a/drivers/s390/cio/vfio_ccw_cp.c
>> +++ b/drivers/s390/cio/vfio_ccw_cp.c
>> @@ -534,10 +534,12 @@ static int ccwchain_fetch_direct(struct ccwchain *chain,
>
> The one minor thing I have is that the function name
> (ccwchain_fetch_direct) is now slightly confusing. But we can easily do
> a patch on top renaming it (if we can come up with a better name.)

Agreed! Maybe just ccwchain_fetch() ? Or perhaps ccwchain_fetch_ccw()
if that won't cause too much confusion with the ccwchain_handle_ccw()
called from cp_init().

>
> Reviewed-by: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>
>

Thanks for all of these! :)