From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.158.5]:46572 "EHLO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725924AbgDVJRp (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Apr 2020 05:17:45 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098419.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 03M95JDE091205 for ; Wed, 22 Apr 2020 05:17:43 -0400 Received: from e06smtp07.uk.ibm.com (e06smtp07.uk.ibm.com [195.75.94.103]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 30gcs5cy63-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Wed, 22 Apr 2020 05:17:43 -0400 Received: from localhost by e06smtp07.uk.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Wed, 22 Apr 2020 10:17:36 +0100 Subject: Re: [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v5 00/10] s390x: Testing the Channel Subsystem I/O References: <1582200043-21760-1-git-send-email-pmorel@linux.ibm.com> <028ece05-1429-7761-cf4e-6fabc34e6aa0@linux.ibm.com> <4a5f0636-cd73-164a-8c7a-ca5679f01e56@redhat.com> <2c30fd52-876d-91b0-9a69-363efabdb86e@linux.ibm.com> From: Pierre Morel Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2020 11:17:36 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <2c30fd52-876d-91b0-9a69-363efabdb86e@linux.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <57fae80f-e298-6763-9f1d-b6f7f92681ed@linux.ibm.com> Sender: linux-s390-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Janosch Frank , David Hildenbrand , kvm@vger.kernel.org Cc: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, thuth@redhat.com, cohuck@redhat.com On 2020-04-22 09:43, Janosch Frank wrote: > On 4/21/20 6:18 PM, David Hildenbrand wrote: >> On 21.04.20 18:13, Pierre Morel wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 2020-02-20 13:00, Pierre Morel wrote: >>> >>> ...snip... >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Pierre Morel (10): >>>> s390x: saving regs for interrupts >>>> s390x: Use PSW bits definitions in cstart >>>> s390x: cr0: adding AFP-register control bit >>>> s390x: export the clock get_clock_ms() utility >>> >>> Please can you consider applying these 4 patches only. >>> I will send some changes I made for the patches on css tests. >>> >> >> The first one requires a little more brain power - can anybody at IBM >> help reviewing that? >> > > I'll try to understand it :) > > But I think we need a new series anyway. > @Pierre: You told me, that you removed delay() and this series still has > it. With the changes needed to the second patch and the delay change we > need all information to make decisions, so a new version of the series > would make sense. > > Yes, this is clear, the next series will have some modifications for the css part. Also I will send two series, first the general patches with bug fixes and comments and in a separate series the css specific patches. Regards, Pierre -- Pierre Morel IBM Lab Boeblingen