From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:54184) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eJDAq-0004Ne-Bx for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 27 Nov 2017 01:45:49 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eJDAn-0007Zl-7a for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 27 Nov 2017 01:45:48 -0500 References: <1511388334-16347-1-git-send-email-pmorel@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1511388334-16347-3-git-send-email-pmorel@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <321b3e16-19bc-f519-4375-fe865ed64bad@redhat.com> <9658fc79-5925-5bc7-0aa6-d20d5ab07b84@linux.vnet.ibm.com> From: Thomas Huth Message-ID: <1efdadee-973f-5418-8f3c-b2a11e42aba2@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2017 07:45:39 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <9658fc79-5925-5bc7-0aa6-d20d5ab07b84@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 2/7] s390x/pci: rework PCI STORE List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Pierre Morel , qemu-devel@nongnu.org Cc: borntraeger@de.ibm.com, pasic@linux.vnet.ibm.com, cohuck@redhat.com, zyimin@linux.vnet.ibm.com, agraf@suse.de, qemu-s390x@nongnu.org On 25.11.2017 11:39, Pierre Morel wrote: > On 23/11/2017 10:01, Thomas Huth wrote: >> On 22.11.2017 23:05, Pierre Morel wrote: >>> Enhance the fault detection, correction of the fault reporting. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Pierre Morel >>> Reviewed-by: Yi Min Zhao >>> --- >>> =C2=A0 hw/s390x/s390-pci-inst.c | 39 ++++++++++++++++++++++----------= ------- >>> =C2=A0 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/hw/s390x/s390-pci-inst.c b/hw/s390x/s390-pci-inst.c >>> index 3e1f1a0..930c197 100644 >>> --- a/hw/s390x/s390-pci-inst.c >>> +++ b/hw/s390x/s390-pci-inst.c >>> @@ -470,6 +470,12 @@ int pcistg_service_call(S390CPU *cpu, uint8_t >>> r1, uint8_t r2) >>> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 pcias =3D (env->regs[r2] >> 16) & 0xf; >>> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 len =3D env->regs[r2] & 0xf; >>> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 offset =3D env->regs[r2 + 1]; >>> +=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 data =3D env->regs[r1]; >>> + >>> +=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 if (!(fh & FH_MASK_ENABLE)) { >>> +=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 setcc(cpu, ZPCI_PCI_LS_IN= VAL_HANDLE); >>> +=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 return 0; >>> +=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 } >>> =C2=A0 =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 pbdev =3D s390_pci_find_dev_by_= fh(s390_get_phb(), fh); >>> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 if (!pbdev) { >>> @@ -479,12 +485,7 @@ int pcistg_service_call(S390CPU *cpu, uint8_t >>> r1, uint8_t r2) >>> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 } >>> =C2=A0 =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 switch (pbdev->state) { >>> -=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 case ZPCI_FS_RESERVED: >>> -=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 case ZPCI_FS_STANDBY: >>> -=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 case ZPCI_FS_DISABLED: >>> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 case ZPCI_FS_PERMANENT_ERROR: >>> -=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 setcc(cpu, ZPCI_PCI_LS_IN= VAL_HANDLE); >>> -=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 return 0; >>> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 case ZPCI_FS_ERROR: >>> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 setcc(cpu, ZPC= I_PCI_LS_ERR); >>> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 s390_set_statu= s_code(env, r2, ZPCI_PCI_ST_BLOCKED); >> >> -EMISSINGPUBLICDOCUMENTATION >=20 > Hi Thomas, >=20 > I do not understand what you mean here Not your fault, I just wanted to express that I can not really review this part of the patch (and thus not provide a Reviewed-by) since there is no public documentation available for zPCI :-( Thomas