On 15.02.2018 15:17, Cornelia Huck wrote: > On Thu, 15 Feb 2018 15:14:37 +0100 > David Hildenbrand <david@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> On 15.02.2018 15:08, Cornelia Huck wrote: >>> On Wed, 7 Feb 2018 12:46:47 +0100 >>> David Hildenbrand <david@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> >>>> Move the Multiple-epoch facility handling into it and rename it to >>>> kvm_s390_get_tod_clock(). >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: David Hildenbrand <david@xxxxxxxxxx> >>>> --- >>>> arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c | 22 +++++++++------------- >>>> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-) >>> >>> Looks correct, but I'm not sure what this buys us? >> >> That we have functions that can be called without having to care about >> multiple epoch facility >> >> Namely >> >> kvm_s390_set_tod_clock() >> kvm_s390_get_tod_clock() >> kvm_s390_get_tod_clock_fast() >> > > OK, that makes sense. Maybe add something like that to the patch > description? > > Reviewed-by: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@xxxxxxxxxx> > Sure, can do! Thanks! -- Thanks, David / dhildenb
