From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:48096) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dnQcP-0002dB-SZ for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 31 Aug 2017 10:38:54 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dnQcL-0004ul-QH for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 31 Aug 2017 10:38:53 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:57586) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dnQcL-0004uX-Jv for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 31 Aug 2017 10:38:49 -0400 Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2017 16:38:36 +0200 From: Cornelia Huck Message-ID: <20170831163836.58a92296.cohuck@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <4694a0bd-6c4e-b762-158f-1f860990448f@redhat.com> References: <20170830170601.15855-1-david@redhat.com> <20170830170601.15855-4-david@redhat.com> <09179efb-0930-bd84-ff22-1f4b23fa6a8e@redhat.com> <20170831162930.17657819.cohuck@redhat.com> <4694a0bd-6c4e-b762-158f-1f860990448f@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v1 03/11] s390x: store cpu states inside machine state List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: David Hildenbrand Cc: Thomas Huth , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Richard Henderson , Aurelien Jarno , borntraeger@de.ibm.com, Alexander Graf On Thu, 31 Aug 2017 16:30:59 +0200 David Hildenbrand wrote: > On 31.08.2017 16:29, Cornelia Huck wrote: > > On Thu, 31 Aug 2017 15:11:28 +0200 > > David Hildenbrand wrote: > > > >>>> +S390CPU *s390_cpu_addr2state(uint16_t cpu_addr) > >>>> +{ > >>>> + S390CcwMachineState *ms = S390_CCW_MACHINE(qdev_get_machine()); > >>>> + > >>>> + if (cpu_addr >= max_cpus) { > >>>> + return NULL; > >>>> + } > >>>> + > >>>> + /* Fast lookup via CPU ID */ > >>>> + return ms->cpus[cpu_addr]; > >>>> +} > >>> > >>> I wonder whether that function should rather go into a file in > >>> target/s390x/ instead, since it is also used there and its prototype is > >>> in cpu.h ? > >> > >> I thought about the same thing, but as it works directly on the machine, > >> like ri_allowed() and friends. So I decided to keep it here for now. > >> > >> I'll think about moving the definition also into > >> include/hw/s390x/s390-virtio-ccw.h > > > > It would be a bit nicer. > > > > Adding patches right now to move everything out of cpu.h that lies under > the "/* outside of target/s390x/ */" section. :) > Ah, you really care about your patch count, don't you? :) (I think it's a good idea.)