[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] [qemu-s390x] [PATCH v2 1/2] vfio-ccw: add force unlimit

From: Halil Pasic
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [qemu-s390x] [PATCH v2 1/2] vfio-ccw: add force unlimited prefetch property
Date: Thu, 24 May 2018 17:42:38 +0200
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.7.0

On 05/24/2018 12:29 PM, Halil Pasic wrote:

On 05/24/2018 09:16 AM, Cornelia Huck wrote:
On Wed, 23 May 2018 19:28:31 +0200
Halil Pasic <address@hidden> wrote:

On 05/23/2018 06:59 PM, Cornelia Huck wrote:
On Wed, 23 May 2018 18:23:44 +0200
Halil Pasic <address@hidden> wrote:
On 05/23/2018 04:46 PM, Cornelia Huck wrote:
+    if (!(sch->orb.ctrl0 & ORB_CTRL0_MASK_PFCH)) {
+        if (!(vcdev->force_orb_pfch)) {
+            warn_report("vfio-ccw requires PFCH flag set");
+            sch_gen_unit_exception(sch);
+            css_inject_io_interrupt(sch);
+            return IOINST_CC_EXPECTED;
+        } else {
+            sch->orb.ctrl0 |= ORB_CTRL0_MASK_PFCH;
+            WARN_ONCE(vcdev->warned_force_orb_pfch, "PFCH flag forced");
This message should probably mention vfio-ccw as well as the subchannel
I was thinking about this. I think all it would make sense to have a common
prefix for all reports coming form vfio-ccw (QEMU). But then I was like, that
is a separate patch.

Maybe something like:
vfio-ccw (xx.xx.xxxx): specific message

OTOH we don't seem to do that elsewhere (git grep -e 
'warn\|error_report\|error_setg' -- hw/s390x/).
AFAIR the error_setg captures context (like, src, line, func) but does not
necessarily report it. Another question is if this should be extended to

What do you think?
I'm not sure that makes sense, especially as not everything might
explicitly refer to a certain subchannel.

Let's just add the subchannel id here? In this case, this is really a
useful piece of information (which device is showing this behaviour?)

I'm doing the changes right now. And while doing it occurred to to me that
a device number is probably preferable over the subchannel id, ie. 
is probably better that cssid.ssid.schid. What we really want to tell is,
which device is affected and not over which subchannel is this device talking.

Agree, disagree?

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]