On 25.01.2018 16:43, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
>
>
> On 01/25/2018 04:31 PM, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> [...]
>>> struct kvm_s390_vsie {
>>> diff --git a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
>>> index 68d7eef..efde264 100644
>>> --- a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
>>> +++ b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
>>> @@ -2518,6 +2518,8 @@ struct kvm_vcpu *kvm_arch_vcpu_create(struct kvm *kvm,
>>> vcpu->arch.sie_block->icpua = id;
>>> spin_lock_init(&vcpu->arch.local_int.lock);
>>> vcpu->arch.sie_block->gd = (u32)(u64)kvm->arch.gisa;
>>> + if (vcpu->arch.sie_block->gd && sclp.has_gisaf)
>>> + vcpu->arch.sie_block->gd |= GISA_FORMAT1;
wonder if the would be nicer via
if (kvm->arch.gisa) {
vcpu->arch.sie_block->gd = (u32)(u64)kvm->arch.gisa;
if (sclp.has_gisaf)
cpu->arch.sie_block->gd |= GISA_FORMAT1;
}
>>> seqcount_init(&vcpu->arch.cputm_seqcount);
>>>
>>> rc = kvm_vcpu_init(vcpu, kvm, id);
>>>
>>
>> So, what does this bring us? We don't seem to be using any new GISA-1
>> features.
>
> Preparation for device pass-through interrupt forwarding.
>
Can you add something like that to the patch description?
Reviewed-by: David Hildenbrand <david@xxxxxxxxxx>
--
Thanks,
David / dhildenb
--
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
