On 30.04.2018 17:41, Janosch Frank wrote:
> On 30.04.2018 15:23, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>> On 27.04.2018 14:36, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>>> In KVM code we use masks to test/set control registers.
>>>
>>> Let's define the ones we use in arch/s390/include/asm/ctl_reg.h and
>>> replace all occurrences in KVM code.
>>>
>>> As we will be needing the define for Clock-comparator sign control soon,
>>> let's also add it.
>>>
>>> Suggested-by: Collin L. Walling <walling@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> Signed-off-by: David Hildenbrand <david@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>
>> Just realized that I was sending out an older version of the patch,
>> (partially updated due to new SIGN bit) the following two hunks are
>> missing
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/s390/kvm/interrupt.c b/arch/s390/kvm/interrupt.c
>> index 5a30fc275a4c..daa09f89ca2d 100644
>> --- a/arch/s390/kvm/interrupt.c
>> +++ b/arch/s390/kvm/interrupt.c
>> @@ -172,7 +172,7 @@ static int ckc_irq_pending(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>> const u64 now = kvm_s390_get_tod_clock_fast(vcpu->kvm);
>> const u64 ckc = vcpu->arch.sie_block->ckc;
>>
>> - if (vcpu->arch.sie_block->gcr[0] & 0x0020000000000000ul) {
>> + if (vcpu->arch.sie_block->gcr[0] & CR0_CLOCK_COMPARATOR_SIGN) {
>> if ((s64)ckc >= (s64)now)
>> return 0;
>> } else if (ckc >= now) {
>> @@ -1062,7 +1062,7 @@ static u64 __calculate_sltime(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>> u64 cputm, sltime = 0;
>>
>> if (ckc_interrupts_enabled(vcpu)) {
>> - if (vcpu->arch.sie_block->gcr[0] & 0x0020000000000000ul) {
>> + if (vcpu->arch.sie_block->gcr[0] & CR0_CLOCK_COMPARATOR_SIGN) {
>> if ((s64)now < (s64)ckc)
>> sltime = tod_to_ns((s64)ckc - (s64)now);
>> } else if (now < ckc) {
>>
>>
>> Christian/Janosch, please tell me if you can fix this up by applying
>> or if I should resend.
>>
>
> Please send a v2 of this patch as a reply, no need for a full resend.
> Thanks for the work, have a nice first of May.
Yes, will send as reference to v1. Thanks - to you, too!
>
> If possible try to get the linux.vnet.ibm.com addresses out of your
> address books. We dropped the vnet bit recently.
>
Oh, haven't noticed that. Thanks for the heads up. maybe in another 10
years you'll be back to a pure "@ibm.com", one step at a time :P
--
Thanks,
David / dhildenb
