On Tue, 17 Oct 2017 18:19:20 +0200 Halil Pasic <pa...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> On 10/17/2017 05:13 PM, Cornelia Huck wrote: > > On Tue, 17 Oct 2017 16:04:46 +0200 > > Halil Pasic <pa...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote: > > > >> Abstract > >> ======= > >> > >> The basic idea is: tell how to handle an unusual condition where it's > >> identified, instead of mapping it to an errno (more or less arbitrarily), > >> then possibly mapping these errnos around, to finally (mentally) map the > >> errno back to the condition and take appropriate action. > >> > >> According to Dong Jia the patch-set also has a functional value: for ccw > >> pass-through, he is planing to pass-through the instruction completion > >> information (cc or interruption condition) from the kernel, and this > >> patch set can pretty much be seen as a preparation for that. > >> > >> Changelog > >> ========= > >> > >> Patch 1 should be already applied to Conny's tree. I've included it > >> nevertheless so guys working on top of current master have everything in > >> place. > >> > >> v2 -> v3: > >> * somewhat uwillingly traded the type safe struct to a somewhat > >> type safe enum (because considered ugly) (Thomas, Conny) > >> * dropped 'template approach' patch which intended to further > >> consolidate IO inst. handlers having lot's of logic and code in > >> common (Conny) > >> * added warning if vfio-ccw ORB does not have the flags required > >> by the vfio-ccw implementation as suggested (Dong Jia) > >> * got rid of some unintentional changes (Dong Jia) > >> * reworded some stuff (comments, commit messages) (Dong Jia) > >> > >> v1 -> v2: > >> * use assert if do_subchannel_work without any functions being > >> accepted > >> * generate unit-exception if ccw-vfio can't handle an otherwise > >> good channel program (due to extra limitations) > >> * keep using return values opposed to recording into SubchDev > >> * split out 'add infrastructure' from 'refactor first handler' > >> * reworded some commit messanges and comments > >> * rebased on top of current master > >> * dropped r-b's and acks because of the magnitude of the > >> changes > >> > >> Testing > >> ======= > >> > >> Nothing happened since v2 except for a quick smoke test. Dong Jia gave v2 > >> a spin with a focus on vfio-ccw. @Dong Jia I would appreciate some proper > >> testing, especially regarding the changes in vfio-ccw (patch #3). > > > > Looks sane to me (if needed, I can fix up the minor things I found). > > > > In addition to some testing, I'd appreciate some review from others as > > well. > > > > Of course, I'm fine with the fixes (won't answer individually). I think > both Dong Jia and Pierre have already put enough work in this to be credited > with a tag, so I really hope they will get around to review this. I would > be especially happy with an Tested-by: Dong Jia since this series is quite > under-tested, and the changes in vfio-ccw aren't just minor. > > Of course I could come up with a test setup myself, but I hope Dong Jia > already has one, and he is certainly more involved with vfio-ccw. FTR: I'll wait until tomorrow for more tags and then go ahead and apply (well, if no problem comes up in the meantime). I need to get a pull request out of the door this week.
