public inbox for linux-s390@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Janosch Frank <frankja@linux.ibm.com>
To: Eric Farman <farman@linux.ibm.com>,
	Nico Boehr <nrb@linux.ibm.com>, Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com>,
	Claudio Imbrenda <imbrenda@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
	kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH kvm-unit-tests v1 6/6] lib: s390x: smp: Convert remaining smp_sigp to _retry
Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2022 10:03:04 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <c3d36f1b-ed45-a188-15b6-83626355bf24@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <500af9df424ebe51e513e167b6ae39dabb4b1378.camel@linux.ibm.com>

On 3/7/22 21:15, Eric Farman wrote:
> On Mon, 2022-03-07 at 15:42 +0100, Nico Boehr wrote:
>> On Fri, 2022-03-04 at 11:56 +0100, Janosch Frank wrote:
>>> On 3/3/22 22:04, Eric Farman wrote:
>>>> A SIGP SENSE is used to determine if a CPU is stopped or
>>>> operating,
>>>> and thus has a vested interest in ensuring it received a CC0 or
>>>> CC1,
>>>> instead of a CC2 (BUSY). But, any order could receive a CC2
>>>> response,
>>>> and is probably ill-equipped to respond to it.
>>>
>>> sigp sense running status doesn't return a cc2, only sigp sense
>>> does
>>> afaik.
>>> Looking at the KVM implementation tells me that it's not doing more
>>> than
>>> looking at the R bit in the sblk.
>>
>>  From the POP I read _all_ orders may indeed return CC=2: case 1 under
>> "Conditions precluding Interpretation of the Order Code".
>>
>> That being said, there are a few more users of smp_sigp (no retry) in
>> smp.c (the test, not the lib).
>>
>> Does it make sense to fix them aswell?
> 
> I thought it made sense to do the lib, since other places expect those
> things to "just work."
> 
> But for the tests themselves, I struggle to convince myself with one
> path over another. The only way KVM returns a CC2 is because of a
> concurrent STOP/RESTART, which isn't a possibility because of the
> waiting the lib itself does when invoking the STOP/RESTART. So should
> the tests be looking for an unexpected CC2? Or just loop when they
> occur? If the latter, shouldn't the lib itself do that?
> 
> I'm happy to make changes, I just can't decide which it should be. Any
> opinions?

Before we continue bikeshedding, let's add the cc2 retry. If it never 
returns cc2 we'll never loop on it but the dead code won't kill us either.

      reply	other threads:[~2022-03-08  9:03 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-03-03 21:04 [PATCH kvm-unit-tests v1 0/6] s390x: SIGP fixes Eric Farman
2022-03-03 21:04 ` [PATCH kvm-unit-tests v1 1/6] lib: s390x: smp: Retry SIGP SENSE on CC2 Eric Farman
2022-03-07 11:50   ` Nico Boehr
2022-03-07 15:20   ` Claudio Imbrenda
2022-03-03 21:04 ` [PATCH kvm-unit-tests v1 2/6] s390x: smp: Test SIGP RESTART against stopped CPU Eric Farman
2022-03-04 10:43   ` Janosch Frank
2022-03-04 14:20     ` Eric Farman
2022-03-07 12:42   ` Nico Boehr
2022-03-07 15:22   ` Claudio Imbrenda
2022-03-03 21:04 ` [PATCH kvm-unit-tests v1 3/6] s390x: smp: Fix checks for SIGP STOP STORE STATUS Eric Farman
2022-03-04 10:40   ` Janosch Frank
2022-03-04 14:38     ` Eric Farman
2022-03-07 18:30       ` Eric Farman
2022-03-03 21:04 ` [PATCH kvm-unit-tests v1 4/6] s390x: smp: Create and use a non-waiting CPU stop Eric Farman
2022-03-07 13:31   ` Nico Boehr
2022-03-07 19:01     ` Eric Farman
2022-03-07 15:30   ` Claudio Imbrenda
2022-03-07 19:03     ` Eric Farman
2022-03-08 10:31       ` Claudio Imbrenda
2022-03-08 21:18         ` Eric Farman
2022-03-09  9:27           ` Claudio Imbrenda
2022-03-03 21:04 ` [PATCH kvm-unit-tests v1 5/6] s390x: smp: Create and use a non-waiting CPU restart Eric Farman
2022-03-07 15:31   ` Claudio Imbrenda
2022-03-03 21:04 ` [PATCH kvm-unit-tests v1 6/6] lib: s390x: smp: Convert remaining smp_sigp to _retry Eric Farman
2022-03-04 10:56   ` Janosch Frank
2022-03-04 14:15     ` Eric Farman
2022-03-07 14:42     ` Nico Boehr
2022-03-07 20:15       ` Eric Farman
2022-03-08  9:03         ` Janosch Frank [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=c3d36f1b-ed45-a188-15b6-83626355bf24@linux.ibm.com \
    --to=frankja@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=david@redhat.com \
    --cc=farman@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=imbrenda@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=nrb@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=thuth@redhat.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox