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=-6.5 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY, SPF_HELO_NONE,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 A3F0DC432C0 for ; Fri, 22 Nov 2019 12:11:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6EB3920679 for ; Fri, 22 Nov 2019 12:11:54 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="eBdQ4VWC" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 6EB3920679 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 ([::1]:50080 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1iY7mz-0000tR-DC for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Fri, 22 Nov 2019 07:11:53 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:44564) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1iY7lv-0000DF-MM for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 22 Nov 2019 07:10:48 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iY7lu-0002SX-9i for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 22 Nov 2019 07:10:47 -0500 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com ([207.211.31.120]:55539 helo=us-smtp-1.mimecast.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iY7lu-0002Qq-6J for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 22 Nov 2019 07:10:46 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1574424644; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=9F9dMAl1LeVGNmr5lhZEgKailWrZLeiLIyUmVmYvttM=; b=eBdQ4VWCjfZ1fPOJQIdBuAOu8VznYnU88p+LPX8VkSLlMJQFQgLT/2vXC+t5JSSR+hJNRw aQ37e+320vJdiXc9hVGa3DPhgQQVsQdGsdPjd5f8DL6YnEcAzYkZuEhpYNq3a0hV0F54Bk LtnOvR8D2jLr/NmHUfWE08oGiewxsNA= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-125-lUeWA11NMMipcXbgRDkfRQ-1; Fri, 22 Nov 2019 07:10:43 -0500 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx08.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7AAF810054E3; Fri, 22 Nov 2019 12:10:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from gondolin (dhcp-192-218.str.redhat.com [10.33.192.218]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 01FD219C70; Fri, 22 Nov 2019 12:10:37 +0000 (UTC) Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2019 13:10:35 +0100 From: Cornelia Huck To: David Hildenbrand Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] s390x: Beautify machine reset Message-ID: <20191122131035.4f334a99.cohuck@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: References: <20191122075218.23935-1-frankja@linux.ibm.com> <20191122075218.23935-5-frankja@linux.ibm.com> Organization: Red Hat GmbH MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.84 on 10.5.11.23 X-MC-Unique: lUeWA11NMMipcXbgRDkfRQ-1 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=WINDOWS-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] [fuzzy] X-Received-From: 207.211.31.120 X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: thuth@redhat.com, Janosch Frank , pmorel@linux.ibm.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, borntraeger@de.ibm.com, qemu-s390x@nongnu.org, mihajlov@linux.ibm.com Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" On Fri, 22 Nov 2019 12:47:44 +0100 David Hildenbrand wrote: > On 22.11.19 12:46, Janosch Frank wrote: > > On 11/22/19 11:59 AM, David Hildenbrand wrote: =20 > >> On 22.11.19 08:52, Janosch Frank wrote: =20 > >>> * Add comments that tell you which diag308 subcode caused the reset > >>> * Sort by diag308 reset subcode > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Janosch Frank > >>> --- > >>> hw/s390x/s390-virtio-ccw.c | 20 ++++++++++---------- > >>> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) > >>> > >>> diff --git a/hw/s390x/s390-virtio-ccw.c b/hw/s390x/s390-virtio-ccw.c > >>> index c1d1440272..88f7758721 100644 > >>> --- a/hw/s390x/s390-virtio-ccw.c > >>> +++ b/hw/s390x/s390-virtio-ccw.c > >>> @@ -330,15 +330,7 @@ static void s390_machine_reset(MachineState *mac= hine) > >>> s390_cmma_reset(); > >>> =20 > >>> switch (reset_type) { > >>> - case S390_RESET_EXTERNAL: > >>> - case S390_RESET_REIPL: > >>> - qemu_devices_reset(); > >>> - s390_crypto_reset(); > >>> - > >>> - /* configure and start the ipl CPU only */ > >>> - run_on_cpu(cs, s390_do_cpu_ipl, RUN_ON_CPU_NULL); > >>> - break; > >>> - case S390_RESET_MODIFIED_CLEAR: > >>> + case S390_RESET_MODIFIED_CLEAR: /* Subcode 0 */ =20 > >> > >> IMHO "Subcode X" isn't of much help here. We're out of diag handling. > >> > >> I'd suggest to just document the subcodes along with the definitions, = if > >> really needed, and drop this patch, at least I don't quite see the val= ue > >> of moving code around here... or is the code shuffling of any value on > >> your prot virt patches? > >> =20 > >=20 > > It keeps me from consulting the POP every time I need to change things > > in the machine resets. This is basically a 1:1 mapping of diag 308 > > subcodes to machine resets, so why don't we want to make that obvious > > and order them by the subcodes? > > =20 >=20 > Because it is not a 1:1 mapping: S390_RESET_EXTERNAL >=20 Tack the explanation onto the definitions of S390_RESET_, then? Probably still quicker than consulting the POP :)