On 29.11.2017 14:51, Thomas Huth wrote:
> On 28.11.2017 21:33, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>> I have quite some patches on my queue for 2.12. (booting Fedora 26/27
>> guests, floating interrupts, machine checks, missing instructions ...)
>>
>> So let's start slowly :) This series gets rid of program_interrupt() and
>> potential_page_fault(). We now always properly restore the cpu state when
>> injecting/delivering a program interrupt. So there is no need to update
>> the state via potential_page_fault() anymore.
>
> I think this series is basically a very good idea! But...
> OK, this is kind of bike-shed-painting now, but since we're currently in
> hard freeze anyway and got plenty of time for discussion:
> Something that bothers me a little bit is the name of the new function
> "program_interrupt_ra()" ... that would IMHO be OK if the old function
> "program_interrupt" would still stay, but since that is removed and the
> _ra function is the only generic way that is left to inject a program
> interrupt, could we maybe name the new function somewhat nicer right
> from the start? Something like "s390_program_interrupt" maybe (which is
> similar to tcg_s390_program_interrupt and kvm_s390_program_interrupt
> that we have already)?
Sure I can do that, other opinions?
>
> Thomas
>
--
Thanks,
David / dhildenb