Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 5 Apr 2022 17:06:23 +0200 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v5 14/21] KVM: s390: pci: provide routines for enabling/disabling interrupt forwarding | From | Pierre Morel <> |
| |
On 4/5/22 15:48, Matthew Rosato wrote: > On 4/5/22 9:39 AM, Niklas Schnelle wrote: >> On Mon, 2022-04-04 at 13:43 -0400, Matthew Rosato wrote: >>> These routines will be wired into a kvm ioctl in order to respond to >>> requests to enable / disable a device for Adapter Event Notifications / >>> Adapter Interuption Forwarding. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Matthew Rosato <mjrosato@linux.ibm.com> >>> --- >>> arch/s390/kvm/pci.c | 247 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>> arch/s390/kvm/pci.h | 1 + >>> arch/s390/pci/pci_insn.c | 1 + >>> 3 files changed, 249 insertions(+) >>> >>> diff --git a/arch/s390/kvm/pci.c b/arch/s390/kvm/pci.c >>> index 01bd8a2f503b..f0fd68569a9d 100644 >>> --- a/arch/s390/kvm/pci.c >>> +++ b/arch/s390/kvm/pci.c >>> @@ -11,6 +11,7 @@ >>> #include <linux/pci.h> >>> #include <asm/pci.h> >>> #include <asm/pci_insn.h> >>> +#include <asm/pci_io.h> >>> #include "pci.h" >>> struct zpci_aift *aift; >>> @@ -152,6 +153,252 @@ int kvm_s390_pci_aen_init(u8 nisc) >>> return rc; >>> } >>> +/* Modify PCI: Register floating adapter interruption forwarding */ >>> +static int kvm_zpci_set_airq(struct zpci_dev *zdev) >>> +{ >>> + u64 req = ZPCI_CREATE_REQ(zdev->fh, 0, ZPCI_MOD_FC_REG_INT); >>> + struct zpci_fib fib = {}; >> >> Hmm this one uses '{}' as initializer while all current callers of >> zpci_mod_fc() use '{0}'. As far as I know the empty braces are a GNU >> extension so should work for the kernel but for consistency I'd go with >> '{0}' or possibly '{.foo = bar, ...}' where that is more readable. >> There too uninitialized fields will be set to 0. Unless of course there >> is a conflicting KVM convention that I don't know about. > > No convention that I'm aware of, I previously had fib = {0} based on the > same rationale you describe and changed to fib = {} per review request > from Pierre a few versions back. I don't have a strong preference, but > I did not note any functional difference between the two and see a bunch > of examples of both methods throughout the kernel. >
Was stupid of me to comment that, as you said there are no difference, so do as you want.
-- Pierre Morel IBM Lab Boeblingen
| |