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=-5.2 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham 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 9749CC432C0 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2019 16:52:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 74CF120833 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2019 16:52:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727605AbfLBQwz (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Dec 2019 11:52:55 -0500 Received: from mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.158.5]:14744 "EHLO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727418AbfLBQwz (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Dec 2019 11:52:55 -0500 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098419.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id xB2GlOVf089429 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2019 11:52:53 -0500 Received: from e06smtp01.uk.ibm.com (e06smtp01.uk.ibm.com [195.75.94.97]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2wm6g8p0vg-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Mon, 02 Dec 2019 11:52:53 -0500 Received: from localhost by e06smtp01.uk.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Mon, 2 Dec 2019 16:52:51 -0000 Received: from b06avi18878370.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (9.149.26.194) by e06smtp01.uk.ibm.com (192.168.101.131) with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted; (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256/256) Mon, 2 Dec 2019 16:52:50 -0000 Received: from d06av23.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06av23.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.105.59]) by b06avi18878370.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id xB2Gqn9347120786 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Mon, 2 Dec 2019 16:52:49 GMT Received: from d06av23.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 20B8AA4051; Mon, 2 Dec 2019 16:52:49 +0000 (GMT) Received: from d06av23.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id D4A7EA4040; Mon, 2 Dec 2019 16:52:48 +0000 (GMT) Received: from oc3016276355.ibm.com (unknown [9.152.222.75]) by d06av23.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Mon, 2 Dec 2019 16:52:48 +0000 (GMT) Subject: Re: [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v2 2/9] s390x: Define the PSW bits To: David Hildenbrand , Janosch Frank , kvm@vger.kernel.org Cc: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, thuth@redhat.com, cohuck@redhat.com References: <1574945167-29677-1-git-send-email-pmorel@linux.ibm.com> <1574945167-29677-3-git-send-email-pmorel@linux.ibm.com> <489b43a4-6f71-71bf-b936-e4c94e52387b@redhat.com> <7daddc03-35ec-f376-c80a-a849f9e11714@linux.ibm.com> <3ce5d72d-ed1d-c689-a13f-6f409d085df7@redhat.com> From: Pierre Morel Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2019 17:52:48 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <3ce5d72d-ed1d-c689-a13f-6f409d085df7@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 x-cbid: 19120216-4275-0000-0000-00000389E9FC X-IBM-AV-DETECTION: SAVI=unused REMOTE=unused XFE=unused x-cbparentid: 19120216-4276-0000-0000-0000389D8500 Message-Id: <2f1383bf-15f0-b2f5-96d4-a4a443f33a96@linux.ibm.com> X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.95,18.0.572 definitions=2019-12-02_03:2019-11-29,2019-12-02 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 malwarescore=0 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 bulkscore=0 phishscore=0 priorityscore=1501 impostorscore=0 suspectscore=0 spamscore=0 mlxscore=0 adultscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-1910280000 definitions=main-1912020144 Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: kvm@vger.kernel.org On 2019-12-02 12:17, David Hildenbrand wrote: > On 02.12.19 12:11, Janosch Frank wrote: >> On 11/28/19 3:36 PM, David Hildenbrand wrote: >>> On 28.11.19 13:46, Pierre Morel wrote: >>>> Let's define the PSW bits explicitly, it will clarify their >>>> usage. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Pierre Morel >>>> --- >>>> lib/s390x/asm/arch_bits.h | 20 ++++++++++++++++++++ >>>> lib/s390x/asm/arch_def.h | 6 ++---- >>> >>> I'm sorry, but I don't really see a reason to move these 4/5 defines to >>> a separate header. Can you just keep them in arch_def.h and extend? >>> >>> (none of your other patches touch arch_bits.h - and it is somewhat a >>> weird name. Where to put something new: arch_def.h or arch_bits.h? I >>> would have understood "psw.h", but even that, I don't consider necessary) >>> >> >> On a related note: >> I'd still like to split up the file soonish, maybe moving the functions >> into a new file? >> >> @Thomas/David: What's your opinion on that? > > Sure, as long as the file header is not longer as its actual content :D > No problem for me. What should the file header be? -- Pierre Morel IBM Lab Boeblingen