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=-4.0 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no 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 D8563C433EB for ; Mon, 27 Jul 2020 11:16:38 +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 AD1D520663 for ; Mon, 27 Jul 2020 11:16:38 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org AD1D520663 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.ibm.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Received: from localhost ([::1]:57990 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1k017W-0008Q6-0X for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Mon, 27 Jul 2020 07:16:38 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:50592) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1k016r-0007z9-MQ; Mon, 27 Jul 2020 07:15:57 -0400 Received: from mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.158.5]:58206 helo=mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1k016q-0006R0-0V; Mon, 27 Jul 2020 07:15:57 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098419.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 06RB1UrR148386; Mon, 27 Jul 2020 07:15:53 -0400 Received: from pps.reinject (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 32htrwdhxb-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Mon, 27 Jul 2020 07:15:53 -0400 Received: from m0098419.ppops.net (m0098419.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by pps.reinject (8.16.0.36/8.16.0.36) with SMTP id 06RB1XHY148720; Mon, 27 Jul 2020 07:15:53 -0400 Received: from ppma03fra.de.ibm.com (6b.4a.5195.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [149.81.74.107]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 32htrwdhwu-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Mon, 27 Jul 2020 07:15:52 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (ppma03fra.de.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma03fra.de.ibm.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 06RBEbvn011767; Mon, 27 Jul 2020 11:15:51 GMT Received: from b06cxnps3074.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06relay09.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.109.194]) by ppma03fra.de.ibm.com with ESMTP id 32gcr0ha1x-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Mon, 27 Jul 2020 11:15:51 +0000 Received: from d06av21.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06av21.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.105.232]) by b06cxnps3074.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 06RBFmHM29884754 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Mon, 27 Jul 2020 11:15:48 GMT Received: from d06av21.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A2E75204E; Mon, 27 Jul 2020 11:15:48 +0000 (GMT) Received: from osiris (unknown [9.171.36.126]) by d06av21.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8FE8A5204F; Mon, 27 Jul 2020 11:15:47 +0000 (GMT) Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2020 13:15:46 +0200 From: Heiko Carstens To: David Hildenbrand Subject: Re: [PATCH RFCv3 6/9] s390x/diag: subcode to query device memory region Message-ID: <20200727111546.GA13770@osiris> References: <20200724143750.59836-1-david@redhat.com> <20200724143750.59836-7-david@redhat.com> <20200727114819.3f816010.cohuck@redhat.com> <963e5931-117e-48cb-b829-d630abff9e42@redhat.com> <20200727120930.7b8803e4.cohuck@redhat.com> <520ac822-df67-b33a-378f-a8f91a3bed2f@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <520ac822-df67-b33a-378f-a8f91a3bed2f@redhat.com> X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.235, 18.0.687 definitions=2020-07-27_07:2020-07-27, 2020-07-27 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 mlxscore=0 priorityscore=1501 phishscore=0 impostorscore=0 spamscore=0 suspectscore=1 mlxlogscore=820 malwarescore=0 bulkscore=0 clxscore=1015 adultscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2006250000 definitions=main-2007270078 Received-SPF: pass client-ip=148.163.158.5; envelope-from=hca@linux.ibm.com; helo=mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: First seen = 2020/07/27 05:40:59 X-ACL-Warn: Detected OS = Linux 3.x [generic] X-Spam_score_int: -35 X-Spam_score: -3.6 X-Spam_bar: --- X-Spam_report: (-3.6 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action 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: Thomas Huth , Janosch Frank , "Michael S . Tsirkin" , Cornelia Huck , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Halil Pasic , Christian Borntraeger , qemu-s390x@nongnu.org, Claudio Imbrenda , Richard Henderson Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" On Mon, Jul 27, 2020 at 12:12:02PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote: > >>>> +#define DIAG500_DEVICE_MEMORY_REGION 4 > >>> > >>> Regardless what we end up with, this needs to be specified > >>> somewhere(tm). > >> > >> Yeah, there, we should also document the existing subcodes. What would > >> be the right place for this? The kernel feels somewhat wrong to me. > > > > The still supported subcode 3 is properly specified in the virtio spec. > > That's not a good place for that new one, though. > > > > QEMU is probably a better place than the kernel to specify stuff, > > although it's not really ideal, either. OTOH, do we ever expect other > > hypervisors to implement this new subcode? > > cloud-hypervisor implements virtio-mem. If it were ever to support s390x > (guess it does not yet), it would also want to implement that one. But > then, it can just look at QEMU doc I guess :) It must be well defined and easy to find also for kernel developers who actually have to care about memory detection code :)