From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-16.5 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 93833C4320A for ; Thu, 12 Aug 2021 15:12:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 69F6A60FBF for ; Thu, 12 Aug 2021 15:12:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S237860AbhHLPNB (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Aug 2021 11:13:01 -0400 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([170.10.133.124]:47066 "EHLO us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231392AbhHLPNA (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Aug 2021 11:13:00 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1628781155; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=QDxZXTIpTkSWXOwwbmUOwQM8t3jJ+z44eFSGMx58n2k=; b=Af8gm469JfdcDEg4U3uBHNQQov/O4d9N/b1EZCAk44SJF1wFDm1FX4VQ8t31lTId1p1C9T xWHR0WhLWQtj0aBaJMWET77hy1LHXY3PkMo/PpZI728XtfEuh8U6baZopp16NAUsICJ1za Dy5/p13fqOJZD2rR3cnPXqfAvhEMim0= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-210-R1EPMqiGMYOL0ry8BjKPVw-1; Thu, 12 Aug 2021 11:12:31 -0400 X-MC-Unique: R1EPMqiGMYOL0ry8BjKPVw-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx07.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.22]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A494987D545; Thu, 12 Aug 2021 15:12:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (unknown [10.39.193.33]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E98C610016F7; Thu, 12 Aug 2021 15:12:26 +0000 (UTC) From: Cornelia Huck To: Pierre Morel , linux-s390@vger.kernel.org Cc: frankja@linux.ibm.com, thuth@redhat.com, kvm@vger.kernel.org, imbrenda@linux.ibm.com, david@redhat.com Subject: Re: [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v2 1/4] s390x: lib: Add SCLP toplogy nested level In-Reply-To: <08c479b7-491a-3f21-c869-d7a76a3af4e5@linux.ibm.com> Organization: Red Hat GmbH References: <1628612544-25130-1-git-send-email-pmorel@linux.ibm.com> <1628612544-25130-2-git-send-email-pmorel@linux.ibm.com> <87czqivn1q.fsf@redhat.com> <08c479b7-491a-3f21-c869-d7a76a3af4e5@linux.ibm.com> User-Agent: Notmuch/0.32.1 (https://notmuchmail.org) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2021 17:12:25 +0200 Message-ID: <87a6lmvgrq.fsf@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.84 on 10.5.11.22 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Aug 12 2021, Pierre Morel wrote: > On 8/12/21 2:56 PM, Cornelia Huck wrote: >> On Tue, Aug 10 2021, Pierre Morel wrote: >> >>> The maximum CPU Topology nested level is available with the SCLP >>> READ_INFO command inside the byte at offset 15 of the ReadInfo >>> structure. >>> >>> Let's return this information to check the number of topology nested >>> information available with the STSI 15.1.x instruction. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Pierre Morel >>> Reviewed-by: Claudio Imbrenda >>> --- >>> lib/s390x/sclp.c | 6 ++++++ >>> lib/s390x/sclp.h | 4 +++- >>> 2 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/lib/s390x/sclp.c b/lib/s390x/sclp.c >>> index 9502d161..ee379ddf 100644 >>> --- a/lib/s390x/sclp.c >>> +++ b/lib/s390x/sclp.c >>> @@ -123,6 +123,12 @@ int sclp_get_cpu_num(void) >>> return read_info->entries_cpu; >>> } >>> >>> +int sclp_get_stsi_parm(void) >>> +{ >>> + assert(read_info); >>> + return read_info->stsi_parm; >> >> Is this a generic "stsi parm", or always the concrete topology nested >> level? IOW, is that name good, or too generic? > > It is the name used in the documentation, but for now only the 3 bits > 5-7 are used for the maximum value of the selector 2 of the STSI > instruction allowed by the machine. Ok. Reviewed-by: Cornelia Huck