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=-5.5 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no 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 A9FD4C4742C for ; Fri, 30 Oct 2020 21:17:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1280B20A8B for ; Fri, 30 Oct 2020 21:17:28 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=ibm.com header.i=@ibm.com header.b="dnWpJAQh" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727693AbgJ3VRZ (ORCPT ); Fri, 30 Oct 2020 17:17:25 -0400 Received: from mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.158.5]:57854 "EHLO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726163AbgJ3VRZ (ORCPT ); Fri, 30 Oct 2020 17:17:25 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098420.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 09UL1Znr052631; Fri, 30 Oct 2020 17:17:23 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ibm.com; h=subject : to : cc : references : from : message-id : date : mime-version : in-reply-to : content-type : content-transfer-encoding; s=pp1; bh=2G50emrylfscXAATrJU9tfzM2of8ayvmd9E8/gVNHHM=; b=dnWpJAQhMcOO0Sea3abeIp3+kDXERbEBX6vF1BtUIMH89K36QVKlulwZz5X/dnJf8iHm mPv3X9K3vvvYF/ZRjjvHdvH94GyxlS4E3Rv8lWNi88ryO96XjCI29P9743Oli6dsoySs 6hl+/dXPSfVxSg4gTfShewl2nINekT+idzINtWV1jMh+bf0OKH6WQyilJ+4/fKiiOf+E te38YaXr3FsHA90YyGPoWaCD3JS5kGuJX2YSuzrgds4eEN0T0z8YPA+Fe8xI+C+e6JCy dMbbJglMrMZ7+FFHOlq7dmH4piD2XgFkfikxym2BWS7jhsar2cwsf7bjPwIwYng3a8/L 5Q== Received: from pps.reinject (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 34gnqqrs5t-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 30 Oct 2020 17:17:23 -0400 Received: from m0098420.ppops.net (m0098420.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by pps.reinject (8.16.0.36/8.16.0.36) with SMTP id 09ULBeBL095561; Fri, 30 Oct 2020 17:17:22 -0400 Received: from ppma04dal.us.ibm.com (7a.29.35a9.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [169.53.41.122]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 34gnqqrs5n-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 30 Oct 2020 17:17:22 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (ppma04dal.us.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma04dal.us.ibm.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 09ULDeNF005409; Fri, 30 Oct 2020 21:17:22 GMT Received: from b01cxnp23032.gho.pok.ibm.com (b01cxnp23032.gho.pok.ibm.com [9.57.198.27]) by ppma04dal.us.ibm.com with ESMTP id 34g1e25g03-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 30 Oct 2020 21:17:22 +0000 Received: from b01ledav004.gho.pok.ibm.com (b01ledav004.gho.pok.ibm.com [9.57.199.109]) by b01cxnp23032.gho.pok.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 09ULHK9s50331990 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 30 Oct 2020 21:17:20 GMT Received: from b01ledav004.gho.pok.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 37529112064; Fri, 30 Oct 2020 21:17:20 +0000 (GMT) Received: from b01ledav004.gho.pok.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7632C112062; Fri, 30 Oct 2020 21:17:19 +0000 (GMT) Received: from cpe-66-24-58-13.stny.res.rr.com (unknown [9.85.162.174]) by b01ledav004.gho.pok.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Fri, 30 Oct 2020 21:17:19 +0000 (GMT) Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 01/14] s390/vfio-ap: No need to disable IRQ after queue reset To: Halil Pasic Cc: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, freude@linux.ibm.com, borntraeger@de.ibm.com, cohuck@redhat.com, mjrosato@linux.ibm.com, alex.williamson@redhat.com, kwankhede@nvidia.com, fiuczy@linux.ibm.com, frankja@linux.ibm.com, david@redhat.com, hca@linux.ibm.com, gor@linux.ibm.com References: <20201022171209.19494-1-akrowiak@linux.ibm.com> <20201022171209.19494-2-akrowiak@linux.ibm.com> <20201027074846.30ee0ddc.pasic@linux.ibm.com> <7a2c5930-9c37-8763-7e5d-c08a3638e6a1@linux.ibm.com> <20201030185636.60fcca52.pasic@linux.ibm.com> From: Tony Krowiak Message-ID: <66de1211-2a18-8c68-e321-a1af42bc4537@linux.ibm.com> Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2020 17:17:19 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20201030185636.60fcca52.pasic@linux.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Language: en-US X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.312,18.0.737 definitions=2020-10-30_10:2020-10-30,2020-10-30 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 impostorscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 clxscore=1015 priorityscore=1501 mlxlogscore=999 malwarescore=0 bulkscore=0 phishscore=0 adultscore=0 spamscore=0 suspectscore=3 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2009150000 definitions=main-2010300152 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: kvm@vger.kernel.org On 10/30/20 1:56 PM, Halil Pasic wrote: > On Thu, 29 Oct 2020 19:29:35 -0400 > Tony Krowiak wrote: > >>>> +void vfio_ap_mdev_remove_queue(struct ap_device *apdev) >>>> +{ >>>> + struct vfio_ap_queue *q; >>>> + struct ap_queue *queue; >>>> + int apid, apqi; >>>> + >>>> + queue = to_ap_queue(&apdev->device); >>> What is the benefit of rewriting this? You introduced >>> queue just to do queue->ap_dev to get to the apdev you >>> have in hand in the first place. >> I'm not quite sure what you're asking. This function is >> the callback function specified via the function pointer >> specified via the remove field of the struct ap_driver >> when the vfio_ap device driver is registered with the >> AP bus. That callback function takes a struct ap_device >> as a parameter. What am I missing here? > Please compare the removed function vfio_ap_queue_dev_remove() with the > added function vfio_ap_mdev_remove_queue() line by line. It should > become clear. Got it. You are one sharp cookie, I'll fix this. > > Regards, > Halil