On 08/28/2013 02:06 PM, Heiko Carstens wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 09:55:00AM +0800, Chen Gang wrote:
>> So in my opnion, it will be better to let all level 1 related functions
>> within "if (level >= 1) {...}" code block, that will make code clearer
>> to readers (or some members may doubt about this code).
>
> I'm not going to apply your patch, otherwise I would have done that already.
>
OK, I can understand.
Hmm... better to provide some reasons, or I have to 'guess'. ;-)
>> BTW: could you provide more information about why need stsi_15_1_x() be
>> in "level 1" ?
>
> That's what the architecture says.
> You can download it here: publibfi.boulder.ibm.com/epubs/pdf/dz9zr009.pdf
>
Firstly, it is a valuable document (at least to me, it is), thanks.
After a quick reference of it, I find the answer below:
for "level 15":
"level 15" is "Current-configuration-level information".
so it should print at any valid level: "level 1, 2, and 3".
that is just equal to "level 1"
and for "level 1,2,3"
"Information about level 1 (the basic machine)"
"Information about level 2 (a logical partition)"
"Information about level 3 (a virtual machine)"
and for "level 4--14"
"None; codes are reserved"
and for "level 0":
"level 0" is for qureying ("Current-configuration-level number")
so "level 1" also need check level number to support "level 0".
Is it correct ?
:-)
Thanks.
--
Chen Gang
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-s390" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
