On Mon, 25 Nov 2019 14:49:54 +0100 Janosch Frank <fran...@linux.ibm.com> wrote:
> On 11/25/19 2:37 PM, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> > On Mon, 25 Nov 2019 04:03:47 -0500
> > Janosch Frank <fran...@linux.ibm.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Let's also move the clear reset function into the reset handler.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Janosch Frank <fran...@linux.ibm.com>
> >> ---
> >> target/s390x/cpu-qom.h | 1 +
> >> target/s390x/cpu.c | 58 +++++++++++++-----------------------------
> >> 2 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 41 deletions(-)
> >>
> >
> >> @@ -453,6 +424,11 @@ static Property s390x_cpu_properties[] = {
> >> DEFINE_PROP_END_OF_LIST()
> >> };
> >>
> >> +static void s390_cpu_reset_clear(CPUState *s)
> >> +{
> >> + return s390_cpu_reset(s, S390_CPU_RESET_CLEAR);
> >> +}
> >> +
> >> static void s390_cpu_class_init(ObjectClass *oc, void *data)
> >> {
> >> S390CPUClass *scc = S390_CPU_CLASS(oc);
> >> @@ -469,7 +445,7 @@ static void s390_cpu_class_init(ObjectClass *oc, void
> >> *data)
> >> scc->load_normal = s390_cpu_load_normal;
> >> #endif
> >> scc->reset = s390_cpu_reset;
> >> - cc->reset = s390_cpu_full_reset;
> >> + cc->reset = s390_cpu_reset_clear;
> >> cc->class_by_name = s390_cpu_class_by_name,
> >> cc->has_work = s390_cpu_has_work;
> >> #ifdef CONFIG_TCG
> >
> > One thing I liked about the previous naming is that it is more obvious
> > that the clear reset is actually the full reset of a cpu. Not sure if
> > keeping that is better than matching the function name to the name of
> > the reset being performed. Opinions?
> >
>
> Are you only worrying for this particular wrapper or in general?
> I'd be happy to rename the wrapper to s390_cpu_reset_full()
Yes, I was thinking about this wrapper only, but don't feel too
strongly.
pgposG0ExOxQl.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
