[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [Qemu-devel] [qemu-s390x] [PATCH v1 for-2.12 00/15] s390x/tcg: clean

From: David Hildenbrand
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [qemu-s390x] [PATCH v1 for-2.12 00/15] s390x/tcg: cleanup and fix program interrupts
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2017 15:06:33 +0100
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.4.0

On 29.11.2017 14:51, Thomas Huth wrote:
> On 28.11.2017 21:33, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>> I have quite some patches on my queue for 2.12. (booting Fedora 26/27
>> guests, floating interrupts, machine checks, missing instructions ...)
>> So let's start slowly :) This series gets rid of program_interrupt() and
>> potential_page_fault(). We now always properly restore the cpu state when
>> injecting/delivering a program interrupt. So there is no need to update
>> the state via potential_page_fault() anymore.
> I think this series is basically a very good idea! But...
> OK, this is kind of bike-shed-painting now, but since we're currently in
> hard freeze anyway and got plenty of time for discussion:
> Something that bothers me a little bit is the name of the new function
> "program_interrupt_ra()" ... that would IMHO be OK if the old function
> "program_interrupt" would still stay, but since that is removed and the
> _ra function is the only generic way that is left to inject a program
> interrupt, could we maybe name the new function somewhat nicer right
> from the start? Something like "s390_program_interrupt" maybe (which is
> similar to tcg_s390_program_interrupt and kvm_s390_program_interrupt
> that we have already)?

Sure I can do that, other opinions?

>  Thomas



David / dhildenb

reply via email to

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