From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C32AC04AB4 for ; Tue, 14 May 2019 09:14:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D4EE820675 for ; Tue, 14 May 2019 09:14:34 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org D4EE820675 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:43777 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hQTW6-0002Aq-49 for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Tue, 14 May 2019 05:14:34 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:60448) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hQTTv-00014A-7M for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 14 May 2019 05:12:20 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hQTTu-0008Ja-7e for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 14 May 2019 05:12:19 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:58588) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hQTTu-0008Hr-1z; Tue, 14 May 2019 05:12:18 -0400 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx07.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.22]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 16AC0C00296E; Tue, 14 May 2019 09:12:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from gondolin (dhcp-192-222.str.redhat.com [10.33.192.222]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B3F741001943; Tue, 14 May 2019 09:12:10 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 14 May 2019 11:12:08 +0200 From: Cornelia Huck To: Christian Borntraeger Message-ID: <20190514111208.781e6358.cohuck@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <4ebcad9e-ce3c-bd86-3c96-e2909d360813@de.ibm.com> References: <1556749903-19221-1-git-send-email-walling@linux.ibm.com> <09293a1c-d000-83a8-46b8-b97ad4fa9774@de.ibm.com> <56e3ace1-6e48-0e20-47d5-b07ac6dfcf31@redhat.com> <20190513134637.3d8bb275.cohuck@redhat.com> <898144e3-615e-5074-fb68-bf9995c64609@de.ibm.com> <155d2ca3-6a48-c99a-fe42-dca8e3fd4344@redhat.com> <066c7470-94a3-a922-9a12-1ca42e474c51@de.ibm.com> <20190514104934.6bba9232.cohuck@redhat.com> <47f7134b-338f-0207-88ae-4c1969be3786@redhat.com> <4ebcad9e-ce3c-bd86-3c96-e2909d360813@de.ibm.com> Organization: Red Hat GmbH MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.84 on 10.5.11.22 X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.31]); Tue, 14 May 2019 09:12:17 +0000 (UTC) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 209.132.183.28 Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v4] s390: diagnose 318 info reset and migration support X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Collin Walling , David Hildenbrand , mst@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, pasic@linux.ibm.com, qemu-s390x@nongnu.org, pbonzini@redhat.com, rth@twiddle.net Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" On Tue, 14 May 2019 11:07:41 +0200 Christian Borntraeger wrote: > On 14.05.19 10:59, David Hildenbrand wrote: > > We can > > > > 1. Fail to start with #cpus > 240 when diag318=on > > 2. Remove the error once we support more than one SCLP response page > > > > Or > > > > 1. Allow to start with #cpus > 240 when diag318=on, but indicate only > > 240 CPUs via SCLP > > 2. Print a warning > > 3. Remove the restriction and the warning once we support more than one > > SCLP response page We'd need compat handling for step 3., then? > > > > While I prefer the second approach (similar to defining zPCI devices > > without zpci=on), I could also live with the first approach. > > Lets just continue with your other suggestion to simply limit the sclp > response and do not do any failure or machine change. That seems like > the easiest solution. That's the second option, right? Should be reasonable.