Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/8] [PATCH RFC v3] s390-qemu: cpu hotplug - Define New SCLP Codes

[Jason J. Herne]

On 09/16/2013 09:53 AM, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> On 05/09/13 13:25, Alexander Graf wrote:
> > On 01.08.2013, at 16:12, Jason J. Herne wrote:
> >
> > > From: "Jason J. Herne" <address@hidden>
> > >
> > > Define new SCLP codes to improve code readability.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Jason J. Herne <address@hidden>
> > > ---
> > > hw/s390x/sclp.c         |    2 +-
> > > include/hw/s390x/sclp.h |    8 ++++++++
> > > 2 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/hw/s390x/sclp.c b/hw/s390x/sclp.c
> > > index 86d6ae0..cb53d7e 100644
> > > --- a/hw/s390x/sclp.c
> > > +++ b/hw/s390x/sclp.c
> > > @@ -45,7 +45,7 @@ static void sclp_execute(SCCB *sccb, uint64_t code)
> > > {
> > >      S390SCLPDevice *sdev = get_event_facility();
> > >
> > > -    switch (code) {
> > > +    switch (code & SCLP_NO_CMD_PARM) {
> >
> > switch (code & ~SCLP_CMD_PARM)
> >
> > Or are the upper bits parm as well? In fact, what about the upper 32 bits?
>
> As of now those are ignored by the sclp. So (code & SCLP_NO_CMD_PARM) seems
> better to me.

What if I rename it to SCLP_CMD_CODE_MASK?  This removes the negative 
from the name and keeps the same semantics.

--
-- Jason J. Herne (address@hidden)