On 06/23/2014 11:32 PM, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote: > On 06/16/2014 06:37 PM, Alexander Graf wrote: >> >> On 16.06.14 10:33, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote: >>> On 06/16/2014 05:16 PM, Cornelia Huck wrote: >>>> On Sat, 14 Jun 2014 12:41:50 +1000 >>>> Alexey Kardashevskiy <a...@ozlabs.ru> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 06/13/2014 04:00 PM, Cornelia Huck wrote: >>>>>> On Fri, 13 Jun 2014 13:36:58 +1000 >>>>>> Alexey Kardashevskiy <a...@ozlabs.ru> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> This implements an NMI interface for s390 and s390-ccw machines. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This removes #ifdef s390 branch in qmp_inject_nmi so new s390's >>>>>>> nmi_monitor_handler() callback is going to be used for NMI. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Since nmi_monitor_handler()-calling code is platform independent, >>>>>>> CPUState::cpu_index is used instead of S390CPU::env.cpu_num. >>>>>>> There should not be any change in behaviour as both @cpu_index and >>>>>>> @cpu_num are global CPU numbers. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Also, s390_cpu_restart() takes care of preforming operations in >>>>>>> the specific CPU thread so no extra measure is required here either. >>>>>> I find this paragraph a bit confusing; I'd just remove it. >>>>> Besides bad english (please feel free to adjust it), what else is >>>>> confusing >>>>> here? I put it there because the spapr patch makes use of >>>>> async_run_on_cpu() and maintainers may ask why I do not do the same for >>>>> other platforms. This way I hoped I could reduce number of versions to >>>>> post :) >>>> What about >>>> >>>> "Note that s390_cpu_restart() already takes care of the specified cpu, >>>> so we don't need to schedule via async_run_on_cpu()." >>> I fail to see how exactly this is better or different but ok :) >>> >>> >>> Alex, should I repost it with Cornelia's suggestion? What should happen >>> next to this patchset? Who is supposed to pick it up? Thanks. >> >> Just post v8 of that single patch with the right message-id as reference. I >> can pick up the patches, but I'd like at least an ack from Paolo on the >> whole set. > > > Anybody, ping? Or we are waiting till x86 machines got QOM'ed and then I'll > repost it with x86 NMI handler? Thanks!
Paolo promised to ack (in irc) and obviously forgot :) Should I give up and stop bothering noble people? :) -- Alexey
