On 5/22/25 9:30 AM, Cédric Le Goater wrote:
On 5/12/25 20:02, Rorie Reyes wrote:
These functions can be invoked by the function that handles interception
of the CHSC SEI instruction for requests indicating the accessibility of
one or more adjunct processors has changed.
Signed-off-by: Rorie Reyes <rre...@linux.ibm.com>
---
hw/vfio/ap.c | 39 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
include/hw/s390x/ap-bridge.h | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++
2 files changed, 61 insertions(+)
diff --git a/hw/vfio/ap.c b/hw/vfio/ap.c
index 5ea5dd9cca..4f88f80c54 100644
--- a/hw/vfio/ap.c
+++ b/hw/vfio/ap.c
@@ -96,6 +96,45 @@ static void vfio_ap_cfg_chg_notifier_handler(void
*opaque)
}
+int ap_chsc_sei_nt0_get_event(void *res)
+{
+ ChscSeiNt0Res *nt0_res = (ChscSeiNt0Res *)res;
+ APConfigChgEvent *cfg_chg_event;
+
+ if (!ap_chsc_sei_nt0_have_event()) {
+ return 1;
+ }
+
+ cfg_chg_event = QTAILQ_FIRST(&cfg_chg_events);
+ memset(nt0_res, 0, sizeof(*nt0_res));
+
+ QTAILQ_REMOVE(&cfg_chg_events, cfg_chg_event, next);
btw, I don't know if this was discussed. Are we OK to manipulate the
'cfg_chg_events' construct withou locking ?
I don't think it was discussed. Since I made it static, should we think
about locking the construct? If so, would using 'static QemuMutex
cfg_chg_events_lock;' to declare it and use 'qemu_mutex_lock()' and
'qemu_mutex_unlock()' to lock and unlock when needed? Tony, do you have
any thoughts on this process?
diff --git a/include/hw/s390x/ap-bridge.h b/include/hw/s390x/ap-bridge.h
index 470e439a98..f4d838bf99 100644
--- a/include/hw/s390x/ap-bridge.h
+++ b/include/hw/s390x/ap-bridge.h
@@ -16,4 +16,26 @@
void s390_init_ap(void);
+typedef struct ChscSeiNt0Res {
+ uint16_t length;
+ uint16_t code;
+ uint8_t reserved1;
+ uint16_t reserved2;
+ uint8_t nt;
+#define PENDING_EVENT_INFO_BITMASK 0x80;
+ uint8_t flags;
+ uint8_t reserved3;
+ uint8_t rs;
+ uint8_t cc;
+} QEMU_PACKED ChscSeiNt0Res;
+
+#define NT0_RES_RESPONSE_CODE 1;
+#define NT0_RES_NT_DEFAULT 0;
+#define NT0_RES_RS_AP_CHANGE 5;
+#define NT0_RES_CC_AP_CHANGE 3;
please drop the ending ';'
Thanks,
C.
Will drop in the next version
