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
