On 11/22/19 11:59 AM, David Hildenbrand wrote: > On 22.11.19 08:52, Janosch Frank wrote: >> * Add comments that tell you which diag308 subcode caused the reset >> * Sort by diag308 reset subcode >> >> Signed-off-by: Janosch Frank <fran...@linux.ibm.com> >> --- >> hw/s390x/s390-virtio-ccw.c | 20 ++++++++++---------- >> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/hw/s390x/s390-virtio-ccw.c b/hw/s390x/s390-virtio-ccw.c >> index c1d1440272..88f7758721 100644 >> --- a/hw/s390x/s390-virtio-ccw.c >> +++ b/hw/s390x/s390-virtio-ccw.c >> @@ -330,15 +330,7 @@ static void s390_machine_reset(MachineState *machine) >> s390_cmma_reset(); >> >> switch (reset_type) { >> - case S390_RESET_EXTERNAL: >> - case S390_RESET_REIPL: >> - qemu_devices_reset(); >> - s390_crypto_reset(); >> - >> - /* configure and start the ipl CPU only */ >> - run_on_cpu(cs, s390_do_cpu_ipl, RUN_ON_CPU_NULL); >> - break; >> - case S390_RESET_MODIFIED_CLEAR: >> + case S390_RESET_MODIFIED_CLEAR: /* Subcode 0 */ > > IMHO "Subcode X" isn't of much help here. We're out of diag handling. > > I'd suggest to just document the subcodes along with the definitions, if > really needed, and drop this patch, at least I don't quite see the value > of moving code around here... or is the code shuffling of any value on > your prot virt patches? >
It keeps me from consulting the POP every time I need to change things in the machine resets. This is basically a 1:1 mapping of diag 308 subcodes to machine resets, so why don't we want to make that obvious and order them by the subcodes?
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature