From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:54642) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1e1vgz-0003QD-1D for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 10 Oct 2017 10:39:37 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1e1vgv-0000OG-Pp for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 10 Oct 2017 10:39:33 -0400 Received: from mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.158.5]:37919 helo=mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1e1vgv-0000Nw-Ib for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 10 Oct 2017 10:39:29 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098416.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.21/8.16.0.21) with SMTP id v9AEbLrH124495 for ; Tue, 10 Oct 2017 10:39:29 -0400 Received: from e06smtp11.uk.ibm.com (e06smtp11.uk.ibm.com [195.75.94.107]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2dgwesb29m-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Tue, 10 Oct 2017 10:39:28 -0400 Received: from localhost by e06smtp11.uk.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Tue, 10 Oct 2017 15:39:27 +0100 References: <20171004154144.88995-1-pasic@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20171004154144.88995-2-pasic@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20171010152551.33ab63f3.cohuck@redhat.com> From: Halil Pasic Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2017 16:39:23 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20171010152551.33ab63f3.cohuck@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <67b57f9c-2dcd-f2bd-88ae-f4ba8e0ccdef@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 1/8] s390x/css: be more consistent if broken beyond repair List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Cornelia Huck Cc: Dong Jia Shi , Pierre Morel , Thomas Huth , qemu-devel@nongnu.org On 10/10/2017 03:25 PM, Cornelia Huck wrote: > On Wed, 4 Oct 2017 17:41:37 +0200 > Halil Pasic wrote: > >> Calling do_subchannel_work with no function control flags set in SCSW is >> a programming error. Currently the handle this differently in >> do_subchannel_work_virtual and do_subchannel_work_passthrough. Let's be >> consistent and guard with a common assert against this programming error. >> >> Signed-off-by: Halil Pasic >> --- >> hw/s390x/css.c | 16 ++++------------ >> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-) > > Thanks, applied. > Thank you! Halil