From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:50945) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dnJ88-0004Ke-QE for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 31 Aug 2017 02:39:09 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dnJ85-00048x-Jf for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 31 Aug 2017 02:39:08 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:56284) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dnJ85-00048Y-Cd for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 31 Aug 2017 02:39:05 -0400 Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2017 08:38:59 +0200 From: Cornelia Huck Message-ID: <20170831083859.11694707.cohuck@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: References: <20170830163609.50260-1-pasic@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20170830163609.50260-2-pasic@linux.vnet.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/9] s390x/css: fix cc handling for XSCH List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Thomas Huth Cc: Halil Pasic , Dong Jia Shi , Pierre Morel , qemu-devel@nongnu.org On Thu, 31 Aug 2017 07:51:17 +0200 Thomas Huth wrote: > On 30.08.2017 18:36, Halil Pasic wrote: > > The function ioinst_handle_xsch is presenting cc 2 when it's supposed to > > present cc 1 and the other way around, because css_do_xsch has the error > > codes mixed up. Fixing the error codes also fixes the priority. > > > > Let us fix this. > > (Nit: In case you respin, I'd suggest to remove the last sentence. You > already used "fix" two times in the previous one) I can also remove it on applying, if Halil agrees (I have not yet reviewed it, though). > > > Signed-off-by: Halil Pasic > > Reported-by: Pierre Morel > > Space missing -------------^ And I can also add that space on applying :) > > > --- > > hw/s390x/css.c | 4 ++-- > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/hw/s390x/css.c b/hw/s390x/css.c > > index 1880b1a0ff..a50fb0727e 100644 > > --- a/hw/s390x/css.c > > +++ b/hw/s390x/css.c > > @@ -1281,12 +1281,12 @@ int css_do_xsch(SubchDev *sch) > > (!(s->ctrl & > > (SCSW_ACTL_RESUME_PEND | SCSW_ACTL_START_PEND | SCSW_ACTL_SUSP))) || > > (s->ctrl & SCSW_ACTL_SUBCH_ACTIVE)) { > > - ret = -EINPROGRESS; > > + ret = -EBUSY; > > goto out; > > } > > > > if (s->ctrl & SCSW_CTRL_MASK_STCTL) { > > - ret = -EBUSY; > > + ret = -EINPROGRESS; > > goto out; > > } > > Using both, EBUSY and EINPROGRESS as error codes sounds very confusing > to me here ... what's the difference between busy and in-progress? So > while you're at it, maybe you could replace the code for CC 2 ("CANCEL > SUBCHANNEL not applicable") with a different error code? IIRC, I used these two as they matched my idea of what happens best (there's a difference between "subchannel is busy" and "the I/O is already in progress, too late to cancel"). "xsch not applicable" is very hard to translate to an Unix error code :/ I'll double-check with the PoP.