From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.158.5]:11532 "EHLO mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725941AbgGGK5L (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Jul 2020 06:57:11 -0400 Subject: Re: [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v10 9/9] s390x: css: ssch/tsch with sense and interrupt References: <1593707480-23921-1-git-send-email-pmorel@linux.ibm.com> <1593707480-23921-10-git-send-email-pmorel@linux.ibm.com> <20200706114655.5088b6b7.cohuck@redhat.com> <02eb7a70-7a74-6f09-334f-004e69aaa198@linux.ibm.com> <20200706162413.1a24fe40.cohuck@redhat.com> From: Pierre Morel Message-ID: Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2020 12:57:03 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20200706162413.1a24fe40.cohuck@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-s390-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Cornelia Huck Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, frankja@linux.ibm.com, david@redhat.com, thuth@redhat.com, drjones@redhat.com On 2020-07-06 16:24, Cornelia Huck wrote: > On Mon, 6 Jul 2020 15:01:50 +0200 > Pierre Morel wrote: > >> On 2020-07-06 11:46, Cornelia Huck wrote: >>> On Thu, 2 Jul 2020 18:31:20 +0200 >>> Pierre Morel wrote: >>> >>>> After a channel is enabled we start a SENSE_ID command using >>>> the SSCH instruction to recognize the control unit and device. >>>> >>>> This tests the success of SSCH, the I/O interruption and the TSCH >>>> instructions. >>>> >>>> The SENSE_ID command response is tested to report 0xff inside >>>> its reserved field and to report the same control unit type >>>> as the cu_type kernel argument. >>>> >>>> Without the cu_type kernel argument, the test expects a device >>>> with a default control unit type of 0x3832, a.k.a virtio-net-ccw. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Pierre Morel >>>> --- >>>> lib/s390x/asm/arch_def.h | 1 + >>>> lib/s390x/css.h | 32 ++++++++- >>>> lib/s390x/css_lib.c | 148 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- >>>> s390x/css.c | 94 ++++++++++++++++++++++++- >>>> 4 files changed, 272 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > (...) > >>>> @@ -114,6 +128,7 @@ retry: >>>> return cc; >>>> } >>>> >>>> + report_info("stsch: flags: %04x", pmcw->flags); >>> >>> It feels like all of this already should have been included in the >>> previous patch? >> >> Yes, I did not want to modify it since it was reviewed-by. > > It's not such a major change (the isc change and this here), though... > what do the others think? changed my mind: What about keeping css_enable() to only do enable, in case we only want to do this, and add a function to modify the ISC. Regards, Pierre -- Pierre Morel IBM Lab Boeblingen