Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v7 3/4] s390x: Migrate to new NMI interface

[Alexey Kardashevskiy]

On 07/03/2014 05:11 PM, Markus Armbruster wrote:
> Alexey Kardashevskiy <address@hidden> writes:
> 
>> On 06/23/2014 11:32 PM, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
>>> On 06/16/2014 06:37 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 16.06.14 10:33, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
>>>>> On 06/16/2014 05:16 PM, Cornelia Huck wrote:
>>>>>> On Sat, 14 Jun 2014 12:41:50 +1000
>>>>>> Alexey Kardashevskiy <address@hidden> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 06/13/2014 04:00 PM, Cornelia Huck wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Fri, 13 Jun 2014 13:36:58 +1000
>>>>>>>> Alexey Kardashevskiy <address@hidden> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> This implements an NMI interface for s390 and s390-ccw machines.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> This removes #ifdef s390 branch in qmp_inject_nmi so new s390's
>>>>>>>>> nmi_monitor_handler() callback is going to be used for NMI.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Since nmi_monitor_handler()-calling code is platform independent,
>>>>>>>>> CPUState::cpu_index is used instead of S390CPU::env.cpu_num.
>>>>>>>>> There should not be any change in behaviour as both @cpu_index and
>>>>>>>>> @cpu_num are global CPU numbers.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Also, s390_cpu_restart() takes care of preforming operations in
>>>>>>>>> the specific CPU thread so no extra measure is required here either.
>>>>>>>> I find this paragraph a bit confusing; I'd just remove it.
>>>>>>> Besides bad english (please feel free to adjust it), what else is
>>>>>>> confusing
>>>>>>> here? I put it there because the spapr patch makes use of
>>>>>>> async_run_on_cpu() and maintainers may ask why I do not do the same for
>>>>>>> other platforms. This way I hoped I could reduce number of versions to
>>>>>>> post :)
>>>>>> What about
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Note that s390_cpu_restart() already takes care of the specified cpu,
>>>>>> so we don't need to schedule via async_run_on_cpu()."
>>>>> I fail to see how exactly this is better or different but ok :)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Alex, should I repost it with Cornelia's suggestion? What should happen
>>>>> next to this patchset? Who is supposed to pick it up? Thanks.
>>>>
>>>> Just post v8 of that single patch with the right message-id as reference. I
>>>> can pick up the patches, but I'd like at least an ack from Paolo on the
>>>> whole set.
>>>
>>>
>>> Anybody, ping? Or we are waiting till x86 machines got QOM'ed and then I'll
>>> repost it with x86 NMI handler? Thanks!
>>
>>
>> Paolo promised to ack (in irc) and obviously forgot :) Should I give up and
>> stop bothering noble people? :)
> 
> No, you should politely bother them again.


That does not seem helping though :-/



-- 
Alexey