These functions can be invoked by the function that handles interception
of the CHSC SEI instruction for requests indicating the accessibility of
one or more adjunct processors has changed.
Signed-off-by: Rorie Reyes <rreyes@linux.ibm.com>
---
hw/vfio/ap.c | 39 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
include/hw/s390x/ap-bridge.h | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++
2 files changed, 61 insertions(+)
diff --git a/hw/vfio/ap.c b/hw/vfio/ap.c
index 5ea5dd9cca..4f88f80c54 100644
--- a/hw/vfio/ap.c
+++ b/hw/vfio/ap.c
@@ -96,6 +96,45 @@ static void vfio_ap_cfg_chg_notifier_handler(void *opaque)
}
+int ap_chsc_sei_nt0_get_event(void *res)
+{
+ ChscSeiNt0Res *nt0_res = (ChscSeiNt0Res *)res;
+ APConfigChgEvent *cfg_chg_event;
+
+ if (!ap_chsc_sei_nt0_have_event()) {
+ return 1;
+ }
+
+ cfg_chg_event = QTAILQ_FIRST(&cfg_chg_events);
+ memset(nt0_res, 0, sizeof(*nt0_res));
+
+ QTAILQ_REMOVE(&cfg_chg_events, cfg_chg_event, next);
+ g_free(cfg_chg_event);
+
+ /*
+ * If there are any AP configuration change events in the queue,
+ * indicate to the caller that there is pending event info in
+ * the response block
+ */
+ if (ap_chsc_sei_nt0_have_event()) {
+ nt0_res->flags |= PENDING_EVENT_INFO_BITMASK;
+ }
+
+ nt0_res->length = sizeof(ChscSeiNt0Res);
+ nt0_res->code = NT0_RES_RESPONSE_CODE;
+ nt0_res->nt = NT0_RES_NT_DEFAULT;
+ nt0_res->rs = NT0_RES_RS_AP_CHANGE;
+ nt0_res->cc = NT0_RES_CC_AP_CHANGE;
+
+ return 0;
+
+}
+
+int ap_chsc_sei_nt0_have_event(void)
+{
+ return !QTAILQ_EMPTY(&cfg_chg_events);
+}
+
static bool vfio_ap_register_irq_notifier(VFIOAPDevice *vapdev,
unsigned int irq, Error **errp)
{
diff --git a/include/hw/s390x/ap-bridge.h b/include/hw/s390x/ap-bridge.h
index 470e439a98..f4d838bf99 100644
--- a/include/hw/s390x/ap-bridge.h
+++ b/include/hw/s390x/ap-bridge.h
@@ -16,4 +16,26 @@
void s390_init_ap(void);
+typedef struct ChscSeiNt0Res {
+ uint16_t length;
+ uint16_t code;
+ uint8_t reserved1;
+ uint16_t reserved2;
+ uint8_t nt;
+#define PENDING_EVENT_INFO_BITMASK 0x80;
+ uint8_t flags;
+ uint8_t reserved3;
+ uint8_t rs;
+ uint8_t cc;
+} QEMU_PACKED ChscSeiNt0Res;
+
+#define NT0_RES_RESPONSE_CODE 1;
+#define NT0_RES_NT_DEFAULT 0;
+#define NT0_RES_RS_AP_CHANGE 5;
+#define NT0_RES_CC_AP_CHANGE 3;
+
+int ap_chsc_sei_nt0_get_event(void *res);
+
+int ap_chsc_sei_nt0_have_event(void);
+
#endif
--
2.48.1On 5/12/25 20:02, Rorie Reyes wrote:
> These functions can be invoked by the function that handles interception
> of the CHSC SEI instruction for requests indicating the accessibility of
> one or more adjunct processors has changed.
>
> Signed-off-by: Rorie Reyes <rreyes@linux.ibm.com>
> ---
> hw/vfio/ap.c | 39 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> include/hw/s390x/ap-bridge.h | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++
> 2 files changed, 61 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/hw/vfio/ap.c b/hw/vfio/ap.c
> index 5ea5dd9cca..4f88f80c54 100644
> --- a/hw/vfio/ap.c
> +++ b/hw/vfio/ap.c
> @@ -96,6 +96,45 @@ static void vfio_ap_cfg_chg_notifier_handler(void *opaque)
>
> }
>
> +int ap_chsc_sei_nt0_get_event(void *res)
> +{
> + ChscSeiNt0Res *nt0_res = (ChscSeiNt0Res *)res;
> + APConfigChgEvent *cfg_chg_event;
> +
> + if (!ap_chsc_sei_nt0_have_event()) {
> + return 1;
> + }
> +
> + cfg_chg_event = QTAILQ_FIRST(&cfg_chg_events);
> + memset(nt0_res, 0, sizeof(*nt0_res));
> +
> + QTAILQ_REMOVE(&cfg_chg_events, cfg_chg_event, next);
> + g_free(cfg_chg_event);
> +
> + /*
> + * If there are any AP configuration change events in the queue,
> + * indicate to the caller that there is pending event info in
> + * the response block
> + */
> + if (ap_chsc_sei_nt0_have_event()) {
> + nt0_res->flags |= PENDING_EVENT_INFO_BITMASK;
> + }
> +
> + nt0_res->length = sizeof(ChscSeiNt0Res);
> + nt0_res->code = NT0_RES_RESPONSE_CODE;
> + nt0_res->nt = NT0_RES_NT_DEFAULT;
> + nt0_res->rs = NT0_RES_RS_AP_CHANGE;
> + nt0_res->cc = NT0_RES_CC_AP_CHANGE;
> +
> + return 0;
> +
extra white line ^
and returning a bool would make more sense.
> +}
> +
> +int ap_chsc_sei_nt0_have_event(void)
> +{
> + return !QTAILQ_EMPTY(&cfg_chg_events);
same here for the bool.
> +}
> +
> static bool vfio_ap_register_irq_notifier(VFIOAPDevice *vapdev,
> unsigned int irq, Error **errp)
> {
> diff --git a/include/hw/s390x/ap-bridge.h b/include/hw/s390x/ap-bridge.h
> index 470e439a98..f4d838bf99 100644
> --- a/include/hw/s390x/ap-bridge.h
> +++ b/include/hw/s390x/ap-bridge.h
> @@ -16,4 +16,26 @@
>
> void s390_init_ap(void);
>
> +typedef struct ChscSeiNt0Res {
> + uint16_t length;
> + uint16_t code;
> + uint8_t reserved1;
> + uint16_t reserved2;
> + uint8_t nt;
> +#define PENDING_EVENT_INFO_BITMASK 0x80;
> + uint8_t flags;
> + uint8_t reserved3;
> + uint8_t rs;
> + uint8_t cc;
> +} QEMU_PACKED ChscSeiNt0Res;
> +
> +#define NT0_RES_RESPONSE_CODE 1;
> +#define NT0_RES_NT_DEFAULT 0;
> +#define NT0_RES_RS_AP_CHANGE 5;
> +#define NT0_RES_CC_AP_CHANGE 3;
> +
> +int ap_chsc_sei_nt0_get_event(void *res);
Documentation would be nice to have since a "return 1" means failure.
> +
> +int ap_chsc_sei_nt0_have_event(void);
> +> #endif
Thanks,
C.
On 5/22/25 9:35 AM, Cédric Le Goater wrote:
> On 5/12/25 20:02, Rorie Reyes wrote:
>> These functions can be invoked by the function that handles interception
>> of the CHSC SEI instruction for requests indicating the accessibility of
>> one or more adjunct processors has changed.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Rorie Reyes <rreyes@linux.ibm.com>
>> ---
>> hw/vfio/ap.c | 39 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> include/hw/s390x/ap-bridge.h | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++
>> 2 files changed, 61 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/hw/vfio/ap.c b/hw/vfio/ap.c
>> index 5ea5dd9cca..4f88f80c54 100644
>> --- a/hw/vfio/ap.c
>> +++ b/hw/vfio/ap.c
>> @@ -96,6 +96,45 @@ static void vfio_ap_cfg_chg_notifier_handler(void
>> *opaque)
>> }
>> +int ap_chsc_sei_nt0_get_event(void *res)
>> +{
>> + ChscSeiNt0Res *nt0_res = (ChscSeiNt0Res *)res;
>> + APConfigChgEvent *cfg_chg_event;
>> +
>> + if (!ap_chsc_sei_nt0_have_event()) {
>> + return 1;
>> + }
>> +
>> + cfg_chg_event = QTAILQ_FIRST(&cfg_chg_events);
>> + memset(nt0_res, 0, sizeof(*nt0_res));
>> +
>> + QTAILQ_REMOVE(&cfg_chg_events, cfg_chg_event, next);
>> + g_free(cfg_chg_event);
>> +
>> + /*
>> + * If there are any AP configuration change events in the queue,
>> + * indicate to the caller that there is pending event info in
>> + * the response block
>> + */
>> + if (ap_chsc_sei_nt0_have_event()) {
>> + nt0_res->flags |= PENDING_EVENT_INFO_BITMASK;
>> + }
>> +
>> + nt0_res->length = sizeof(ChscSeiNt0Res);
>> + nt0_res->code = NT0_RES_RESPONSE_CODE;
>> + nt0_res->nt = NT0_RES_NT_DEFAULT;
>> + nt0_res->rs = NT0_RES_RS_AP_CHANGE;
>> + nt0_res->cc = NT0_RES_CC_AP_CHANGE;
>> +
>> + return 0;
>> +
>
> extra white line ^
>
> and returning a bool would make more sense.
It may make more sense from a readability standpoint,
but if you look at the caller (chsc_sei_nt0_get_event in
target/s390x/ioinst.c),
it returns an int, so it can simply return whatever is returned from this
function. On the other hand, it really doesn't make a difference, so if
you feel strongly about this, then it can be changed to a bool.
>
>> +}
>> +
>> +int ap_chsc_sei_nt0_have_event(void)
>> +{
>> + return !QTAILQ_EMPTY(&cfg_chg_events);
>
> same here for the bool.
same as above
>
>> +}
>> +
>> static bool vfio_ap_register_irq_notifier(VFIOAPDevice *vapdev,
>> unsigned int irq, Error
>> **errp)
>> {
>> diff --git a/include/hw/s390x/ap-bridge.h b/include/hw/s390x/ap-bridge.h
>> index 470e439a98..f4d838bf99 100644
>> --- a/include/hw/s390x/ap-bridge.h
>> +++ b/include/hw/s390x/ap-bridge.h
>> @@ -16,4 +16,26 @@
>> void s390_init_ap(void);
>> +typedef struct ChscSeiNt0Res {
>> + uint16_t length;
>> + uint16_t code;
>> + uint8_t reserved1;
>> + uint16_t reserved2;
>> + uint8_t nt;
>> +#define PENDING_EVENT_INFO_BITMASK 0x80;
>> + uint8_t flags;
>> + uint8_t reserved3;
>> + uint8_t rs;
>> + uint8_t cc;
>> +} QEMU_PACKED ChscSeiNt0Res;
>> +
>> +#define NT0_RES_RESPONSE_CODE 1;
>> +#define NT0_RES_NT_DEFAULT 0;
>> +#define NT0_RES_RS_AP_CHANGE 5;
>> +#define NT0_RES_CC_AP_CHANGE 3;
>> +
>> +int ap_chsc_sei_nt0_get_event(void *res);
>
> Documentation would be nice to have since a "return 1" means failure.
True.
>
>> +
>> +int ap_chsc_sei_nt0_have_event(void);
>> +> #endif
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> C.
>
>
On 5/22/25 3:02 PM, Anthony Krowiak wrote:
>
>
>
> On 5/22/25 9:35 AM, Cédric Le Goater wrote:
>> On 5/12/25 20:02, Rorie Reyes wrote:
>>> These functions can be invoked by the function that handles
>>> interception
>>> of the CHSC SEI instruction for requests indicating the
>>> accessibility of
>>> one or more adjunct processors has changed.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Rorie Reyes <rreyes@linux.ibm.com>
>>> ---
>>> hw/vfio/ap.c | 39
>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>> include/hw/s390x/ap-bridge.h | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++
>>> 2 files changed, 61 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/hw/vfio/ap.c b/hw/vfio/ap.c
>>> index 5ea5dd9cca..4f88f80c54 100644
>>> --- a/hw/vfio/ap.c
>>> +++ b/hw/vfio/ap.c
>>> @@ -96,6 +96,45 @@ static void vfio_ap_cfg_chg_notifier_handler(void
>>> *opaque)
>>> }
>>> +int ap_chsc_sei_nt0_get_event(void *res)
>>> +{
>>> + ChscSeiNt0Res *nt0_res = (ChscSeiNt0Res *)res;
>>> + APConfigChgEvent *cfg_chg_event;
>>> +
>>> + if (!ap_chsc_sei_nt0_have_event()) {
>>> + return 1;
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> + cfg_chg_event = QTAILQ_FIRST(&cfg_chg_events);
>>> + memset(nt0_res, 0, sizeof(*nt0_res));
>>> +
>>> + QTAILQ_REMOVE(&cfg_chg_events, cfg_chg_event, next);
>>> + g_free(cfg_chg_event);
>>> +
>>> + /*
>>> + * If there are any AP configuration change events in the queue,
>>> + * indicate to the caller that there is pending event info in
>>> + * the response block
>>> + */
>>> + if (ap_chsc_sei_nt0_have_event()) {
>>> + nt0_res->flags |= PENDING_EVENT_INFO_BITMASK;
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> + nt0_res->length = sizeof(ChscSeiNt0Res);
>>> + nt0_res->code = NT0_RES_RESPONSE_CODE;
>>> + nt0_res->nt = NT0_RES_NT_DEFAULT;
>>> + nt0_res->rs = NT0_RES_RS_AP_CHANGE;
>>> + nt0_res->cc = NT0_RES_CC_AP_CHANGE;
>>> +
>>> + return 0;
>>> +
>>
>> extra white line ^
>>
>> and returning a bool would make more sense.
>
> It may make more sense from a readability standpoint,
> but if you look at the caller (chsc_sei_nt0_get_event in
> target/s390x/ioinst.c),
> it returns an int, so it can simply return whatever is returned from this
> function. On the other hand, it really doesn't make a difference, so if
> you feel strongly about this, then it can be changed to a bool.
>
>
I think I'd rather keep the returns as is because I've went through
several changes that uses a bool return and my code doesn't work as
designed. The ap config doesn't update in real time which allows the
polling time to take over when notifying the guest. Would it suffice to
document the following in ap-bridge.h (the comment bellow)
>>
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> +int ap_chsc_sei_nt0_have_event(void)
>>> +{
>>> + return !QTAILQ_EMPTY(&cfg_chg_events);
>>
>> same here for the bool.
>
> same as above
>
>>
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> static bool vfio_ap_register_irq_notifier(VFIOAPDevice *vapdev,
>>> unsigned int irq, Error
>>> **errp)
>>> {
>>> diff --git a/include/hw/s390x/ap-bridge.h
>>> b/include/hw/s390x/ap-bridge.h
>>> index 470e439a98..f4d838bf99 100644
>>> --- a/include/hw/s390x/ap-bridge.h
>>> +++ b/include/hw/s390x/ap-bridge.h
>>> @@ -16,4 +16,26 @@
>>> void s390_init_ap(void);
>>> +typedef struct ChscSeiNt0Res {
>>> + uint16_t length;
>>> + uint16_t code;
>>> + uint8_t reserved1;
>>> + uint16_t reserved2;
>>> + uint8_t nt;
>>> +#define PENDING_EVENT_INFO_BITMASK 0x80;
>>> + uint8_t flags;
>>> + uint8_t reserved3;
>>> + uint8_t rs;
>>> + uint8_t cc;
>>> +} QEMU_PACKED ChscSeiNt0Res;
>>> +
>>> +#define NT0_RES_RESPONSE_CODE 1;
>>> +#define NT0_RES_NT_DEFAULT 0;
>>> +#define NT0_RES_RS_AP_CHANGE 5;
>>> +#define NT0_RES_CC_AP_CHANGE 3;
>>> +
>>> +int ap_chsc_sei_nt0_get_event(void *res);
>>
>> Documentation would be nice to have since a "return 1" means failure.
>
> True.
>
Since I want to keep the return as is, will this documentation suffice?
/**
* ap_chsc_sei_nt0_get_event - Retrieve the next pending AP config
* change event
* @res:Pointer to a ChscSeiNt0Res struct to be filled with event
* data
*
* This function checks for any pending AP config change events and,
* if present, populates the provided response structure with the
* appropriate SEI NT0 fields.
*
* Return:
* 0 - An event was available and written to @res
* 1 - No event was available
*/
>>
>>> +
>>> +int ap_chsc_sei_nt0_have_event(void);
>>> +> #endif
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> C.
>>
>>
>
Please ignore my comments bellow. I made some foundational mistakes
going through this process. I should be able to return bools based on
Cedric's remarks. I flipped the meaning behind returning 1 vs 0 as false
vs true which is incorrect. Returning 1 is true and returning 0 is
false. I had those concepts mixed up. I apologize
On 5/22/25 11:05 PM, Rorie Reyes wrote:
>
>
> On 5/22/25 3:02 PM, Anthony Krowiak wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On 5/22/25 9:35 AM, Cédric Le Goater wrote:
>>> On 5/12/25 20:02, Rorie Reyes wrote:
>>>> These functions can be invoked by the function that handles
>>>> interception
>>>> of the CHSC SEI instruction for requests indicating the
>>>> accessibility of
>>>> one or more adjunct processors has changed.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Rorie Reyes <rreyes@linux.ibm.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> hw/vfio/ap.c | 39
>>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>> include/hw/s390x/ap-bridge.h | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++
>>>> 2 files changed, 61 insertions(+)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/hw/vfio/ap.c b/hw/vfio/ap.c
>>>> index 5ea5dd9cca..4f88f80c54 100644
>>>> --- a/hw/vfio/ap.c
>>>> +++ b/hw/vfio/ap.c
>>>> @@ -96,6 +96,45 @@ static void
>>>> vfio_ap_cfg_chg_notifier_handler(void *opaque)
>>>> }
>>>> +int ap_chsc_sei_nt0_get_event(void *res)
>>>> +{
>>>> + ChscSeiNt0Res *nt0_res = (ChscSeiNt0Res *)res;
>>>> + APConfigChgEvent *cfg_chg_event;
>>>> +
>>>> + if (!ap_chsc_sei_nt0_have_event()) {
>>>> + return 1;
>>>> + }
>>>> +
>>>> + cfg_chg_event = QTAILQ_FIRST(&cfg_chg_events);
>>>> + memset(nt0_res, 0, sizeof(*nt0_res));
>>>> +
>>>> + QTAILQ_REMOVE(&cfg_chg_events, cfg_chg_event, next);
>>>> + g_free(cfg_chg_event);
>>>> +
>>>> + /*
>>>> + * If there are any AP configuration change events in the queue,
>>>> + * indicate to the caller that there is pending event info in
>>>> + * the response block
>>>> + */
>>>> + if (ap_chsc_sei_nt0_have_event()) {
>>>> + nt0_res->flags |= PENDING_EVENT_INFO_BITMASK;
>>>> + }
>>>> +
>>>> + nt0_res->length = sizeof(ChscSeiNt0Res);
>>>> + nt0_res->code = NT0_RES_RESPONSE_CODE;
>>>> + nt0_res->nt = NT0_RES_NT_DEFAULT;
>>>> + nt0_res->rs = NT0_RES_RS_AP_CHANGE;
>>>> + nt0_res->cc = NT0_RES_CC_AP_CHANGE;
>>>> +
>>>> + return 0;
>>>> +
>>>
>>> extra white line ^
>>>
>>> and returning a bool would make more sense.
>>
>> It may make more sense from a readability standpoint,
>> but if you look at the caller (chsc_sei_nt0_get_event in
>> target/s390x/ioinst.c),
>> it returns an int, so it can simply return whatever is returned from
>> this
>> function. On the other hand, it really doesn't make a difference, so if
>> you feel strongly about this, then it can be changed to a bool.
>>
>>
> I think I'd rather keep the returns as is because I've went through
> several changes that uses a bool return and my code doesn't work as
> designed. The ap config doesn't update in real time which allows the
> polling time to take over when notifying the guest. Would it suffice
> to document the following in ap-bridge.h (the comment bellow)
>>>
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>> +int ap_chsc_sei_nt0_have_event(void)
>>>> +{
>>>> + return !QTAILQ_EMPTY(&cfg_chg_events);
>>>
>>> same here for the bool.
>>
>> same as above
>>
>>>
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>> static bool vfio_ap_register_irq_notifier(VFIOAPDevice *vapdev,
>>>> unsigned int irq, Error
>>>> **errp)
>>>> {
>>>> diff --git a/include/hw/s390x/ap-bridge.h
>>>> b/include/hw/s390x/ap-bridge.h
>>>> index 470e439a98..f4d838bf99 100644
>>>> --- a/include/hw/s390x/ap-bridge.h
>>>> +++ b/include/hw/s390x/ap-bridge.h
>>>> @@ -16,4 +16,26 @@
>>>> void s390_init_ap(void);
>>>> +typedef struct ChscSeiNt0Res {
>>>> + uint16_t length;
>>>> + uint16_t code;
>>>> + uint8_t reserved1;
>>>> + uint16_t reserved2;
>>>> + uint8_t nt;
>>>> +#define PENDING_EVENT_INFO_BITMASK 0x80;
>>>> + uint8_t flags;
>>>> + uint8_t reserved3;
>>>> + uint8_t rs;
>>>> + uint8_t cc;
>>>> +} QEMU_PACKED ChscSeiNt0Res;
>>>> +
>>>> +#define NT0_RES_RESPONSE_CODE 1;
>>>> +#define NT0_RES_NT_DEFAULT 0;
>>>> +#define NT0_RES_RS_AP_CHANGE 5;
>>>> +#define NT0_RES_CC_AP_CHANGE 3;
>>>> +
>>>> +int ap_chsc_sei_nt0_get_event(void *res);
>>>
>>> Documentation would be nice to have since a "return 1" means failure.
>>
>> True.
>>
> Since I want to keep the return as is, will this documentation suffice?
>
>
> /**
> * ap_chsc_sei_nt0_get_event - Retrieve the next pending AP config
> * change event
> * @res:Pointer to a ChscSeiNt0Res struct to be filled with event
> * data
> *
> * This function checks for any pending AP config change events and,
> * if present, populates the provided response structure with the
> * appropriate SEI NT0 fields.
> *
> * Return:
> * 0 - An event was available and written to @res
> * 1 - No event was available
> */
>>>
>>>> +
>>>> +int ap_chsc_sei_nt0_have_event(void);
>>>> +> #endif
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> C.
>>>
>>>
>>
On 5/12/25 20:02, Rorie Reyes wrote:
> These functions can be invoked by the function that handles interception
> of the CHSC SEI instruction for requests indicating the accessibility of
> one or more adjunct processors has changed.
>
> Signed-off-by: Rorie Reyes <rreyes@linux.ibm.com>
> ---
> hw/vfio/ap.c | 39 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> include/hw/s390x/ap-bridge.h | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++
> 2 files changed, 61 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/hw/vfio/ap.c b/hw/vfio/ap.c
> index 5ea5dd9cca..4f88f80c54 100644
> --- a/hw/vfio/ap.c
> +++ b/hw/vfio/ap.c
> @@ -96,6 +96,45 @@ static void vfio_ap_cfg_chg_notifier_handler(void *opaque)
>
> }
>
> +int ap_chsc_sei_nt0_get_event(void *res)
> +{
> + ChscSeiNt0Res *nt0_res = (ChscSeiNt0Res *)res;
> + APConfigChgEvent *cfg_chg_event;
> +
> + if (!ap_chsc_sei_nt0_have_event()) {
> + return 1;
> + }
> +
> + cfg_chg_event = QTAILQ_FIRST(&cfg_chg_events);
> + memset(nt0_res, 0, sizeof(*nt0_res));
> +
> + QTAILQ_REMOVE(&cfg_chg_events, cfg_chg_event, next);
btw, I don't know if this was discussed. Are we OK to manipulate the
'cfg_chg_events' construct withou locking ?
> + g_free(cfg_chg_event);
> +
> + /*
> + * If there are any AP configuration change events in the queue,
> + * indicate to the caller that there is pending event info in
> + * the response block
> + */
> + if (ap_chsc_sei_nt0_have_event()) {
> + nt0_res->flags |= PENDING_EVENT_INFO_BITMASK;
> + }
> +
> + nt0_res->length = sizeof(ChscSeiNt0Res);
> + nt0_res->code = NT0_RES_RESPONSE_CODE;
> + nt0_res->nt = NT0_RES_NT_DEFAULT;
> + nt0_res->rs = NT0_RES_RS_AP_CHANGE;
> + nt0_res->cc = NT0_RES_CC_AP_CHANGE;
> +
> + return 0;
> +
> +}
> +
> +int ap_chsc_sei_nt0_have_event(void)
> +{
> + return !QTAILQ_EMPTY(&cfg_chg_events);
> +}
> +
> static bool vfio_ap_register_irq_notifier(VFIOAPDevice *vapdev,
> unsigned int irq, Error **errp)
> {
> diff --git a/include/hw/s390x/ap-bridge.h b/include/hw/s390x/ap-bridge.h
> index 470e439a98..f4d838bf99 100644
> --- a/include/hw/s390x/ap-bridge.h
> +++ b/include/hw/s390x/ap-bridge.h
> @@ -16,4 +16,26 @@
>
> void s390_init_ap(void);
>
> +typedef struct ChscSeiNt0Res {
> + uint16_t length;
> + uint16_t code;
> + uint8_t reserved1;
> + uint16_t reserved2;
> + uint8_t nt;
> +#define PENDING_EVENT_INFO_BITMASK 0x80;
> + uint8_t flags;
> + uint8_t reserved3;
> + uint8_t rs;
> + uint8_t cc;
> +} QEMU_PACKED ChscSeiNt0Res;
> +
> +#define NT0_RES_RESPONSE_CODE 1;
> +#define NT0_RES_NT_DEFAULT 0;
> +#define NT0_RES_RS_AP_CHANGE 5;
> +#define NT0_RES_CC_AP_CHANGE 3;
please drop the ending ';'
Thanks,
C.
> +int ap_chsc_sei_nt0_get_event(void *res);
> +
> +int ap_chsc_sei_nt0_have_event(void);
> +
> #endif
On 5/22/25 9:30 AM, Cédric Le Goater wrote:
> On 5/12/25 20:02, Rorie Reyes wrote:
>> These functions can be invoked by the function that handles interception
>> of the CHSC SEI instruction for requests indicating the accessibility of
>> one or more adjunct processors has changed.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Rorie Reyes <rreyes@linux.ibm.com>
>> ---
>> hw/vfio/ap.c | 39 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> include/hw/s390x/ap-bridge.h | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++
>> 2 files changed, 61 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/hw/vfio/ap.c b/hw/vfio/ap.c
>> index 5ea5dd9cca..4f88f80c54 100644
>> --- a/hw/vfio/ap.c
>> +++ b/hw/vfio/ap.c
>> @@ -96,6 +96,45 @@ static void vfio_ap_cfg_chg_notifier_handler(void
>> *opaque)
>> }
>> +int ap_chsc_sei_nt0_get_event(void *res)
>> +{
>> + ChscSeiNt0Res *nt0_res = (ChscSeiNt0Res *)res;
>> + APConfigChgEvent *cfg_chg_event;
>> +
>> + if (!ap_chsc_sei_nt0_have_event()) {
>> + return 1;
>> + }
>> +
>> + cfg_chg_event = QTAILQ_FIRST(&cfg_chg_events);
>> + memset(nt0_res, 0, sizeof(*nt0_res));
>> +
>> + QTAILQ_REMOVE(&cfg_chg_events, cfg_chg_event, next);
>
> btw, I don't know if this was discussed. Are we OK to manipulate the
> 'cfg_chg_events' construct withou locking ?
This has never been discussed, but it's an interesting question. The
ap_chsc_sei_nt0_get_event and ap_chsc_sei_nt0_have_event functions
are called as a result of a SIE exit to handle interception of a
CHSC SEI instruction. Handling of the intercepted instructions is
done under the Big QEMU Lock (see kvm_arch_handle_exit in
target/s390x/kvm/kvm.c),
so presumably no other processes will get access to these functions
until the instruction is handled.
On the other hand, the vfio_cfg_chg_notifier_handler function that
handles the eventfd
indicating the guest's AP configuration has been changed by the host
device driver
adds APConfigChgEvent objects to this queue. If, however, you think
about the flow,
when the notifier handler gets called to handle an AP config changed
event, it
queues a channel request word (CRW) indicating there is an SEI pending.
Consequently,
the ap_chsc_sei_nt0_get_event and ap_chsc_sei_nt0_have_event functions
will get called
only after the guest receives the CRW event and executes the CHSC SEI
instruction. Since
the Big QEMU Lock is taken when the CHSC SE instruction is intercepted,
it can not proceed
until whatever the holding process releases it; so for that flow, it
seems highly likely if not
impossible for conflict given the event will always be added to the
queue before an attempt
can be made to retrieve it.
Having gone through this dissertation, I don't see how it can hurt to
lock the queue when
it is being accessed and would certainly make things bullet proof. What
is your opinion?
>
>> + g_free(cfg_chg_event);
>> +
>> + /*
>> + * If there are any AP configuration change events in the queue,
>> + * indicate to the caller that there is pending event info in
>> + * the response block
>> + */
>> + if (ap_chsc_sei_nt0_have_event()) {
>> + nt0_res->flags |= PENDING_EVENT_INFO_BITMASK;
>> + }
>> +
>> + nt0_res->length = sizeof(ChscSeiNt0Res);
>> + nt0_res->code = NT0_RES_RESPONSE_CODE;
>> + nt0_res->nt = NT0_RES_NT_DEFAULT;
>> + nt0_res->rs = NT0_RES_RS_AP_CHANGE;
>> + nt0_res->cc = NT0_RES_CC_AP_CHANGE;
>> +
>> + return 0;
>> +
>> +}
>> +
>> +int ap_chsc_sei_nt0_have_event(void)
>> +{
>> + return !QTAILQ_EMPTY(&cfg_chg_events);
>> +}
>> +
>> static bool vfio_ap_register_irq_notifier(VFIOAPDevice *vapdev,
>> unsigned int irq, Error
>> **errp)
>> {
>> diff --git a/include/hw/s390x/ap-bridge.h b/include/hw/s390x/ap-bridge.h
>> index 470e439a98..f4d838bf99 100644
>> --- a/include/hw/s390x/ap-bridge.h
>> +++ b/include/hw/s390x/ap-bridge.h
>> @@ -16,4 +16,26 @@
>> void s390_init_ap(void);
>> +typedef struct ChscSeiNt0Res {
>> + uint16_t length;
>> + uint16_t code;
>> + uint8_t reserved1;
>> + uint16_t reserved2;
>> + uint8_t nt;
>> +#define PENDING_EVENT_INFO_BITMASK 0x80;
>> + uint8_t flags;
>> + uint8_t reserved3;
>> + uint8_t rs;
>> + uint8_t cc;
>> +} QEMU_PACKED ChscSeiNt0Res;
>> +
>> +#define NT0_RES_RESPONSE_CODE 1;
>> +#define NT0_RES_NT_DEFAULT 0;
>> +#define NT0_RES_RS_AP_CHANGE 5;
>> +#define NT0_RES_CC_AP_CHANGE 3;
>
>
>
> please drop the ending ';'
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> C.
>
>
>> +int ap_chsc_sei_nt0_get_event(void *res);
>> +
>> +int ap_chsc_sei_nt0_have_event(void);
>> +
>> #endif
>
On 5/22/25 20:55, Anthony Krowiak wrote:
>
>
>
> On 5/22/25 9:30 AM, Cédric Le Goater wrote:
>> On 5/12/25 20:02, Rorie Reyes wrote:
>>> These functions can be invoked by the function that handles interception
>>> of the CHSC SEI instruction for requests indicating the accessibility of
>>> one or more adjunct processors has changed.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Rorie Reyes <rreyes@linux.ibm.com>
>>> ---
>>> hw/vfio/ap.c | 39 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>> include/hw/s390x/ap-bridge.h | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++
>>> 2 files changed, 61 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/hw/vfio/ap.c b/hw/vfio/ap.c
>>> index 5ea5dd9cca..4f88f80c54 100644
>>> --- a/hw/vfio/ap.c
>>> +++ b/hw/vfio/ap.c
>>> @@ -96,6 +96,45 @@ static void vfio_ap_cfg_chg_notifier_handler(void *opaque)
>>> }
>>> +int ap_chsc_sei_nt0_get_event(void *res)
>>> +{
>>> + ChscSeiNt0Res *nt0_res = (ChscSeiNt0Res *)res;
>>> + APConfigChgEvent *cfg_chg_event;
>>> +
>>> + if (!ap_chsc_sei_nt0_have_event()) {
>>> + return 1;
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> + cfg_chg_event = QTAILQ_FIRST(&cfg_chg_events);
>>> + memset(nt0_res, 0, sizeof(*nt0_res));
>>> +
>>> + QTAILQ_REMOVE(&cfg_chg_events, cfg_chg_event, next);
>>
>> btw, I don't know if this was discussed. Are we OK to manipulate the
>> 'cfg_chg_events' construct withou locking ?
>
> This has never been discussed, but it's an interesting question. The
> ap_chsc_sei_nt0_get_event and ap_chsc_sei_nt0_have_event functions
> are called as a result of a SIE exit to handle interception of a
> CHSC SEI instruction. Handling of the intercepted instructions is
> done under the Big QEMU Lock (see kvm_arch_handle_exit in target/s390x/kvm/kvm.c),
> so presumably no other processes will get access to these functions
> until the instruction is handled.
>
> On the other hand, the vfio_cfg_chg_notifier_handler function that handles the eventfd
> indicating the guest's AP configuration has been changed by the host device driver
> adds APConfigChgEvent objects to this queue. If, however, you think about the flow,
> when the notifier handler gets called to handle an AP config changed event, it
> queues a channel request word (CRW) indicating there is an SEI pending. Consequently,
> the ap_chsc_sei_nt0_get_event and ap_chsc_sei_nt0_have_event functions will get called
> only after the guest receives the CRW event and executes the CHSC SEI instruction. Since
> the Big QEMU Lock is taken when the CHSC SE instruction is intercepted, it can not proceed
> until whatever the holding process releases it; so for that flow, it seems highly likely if not
> impossible for conflict given the event will always be added to the queue before an attempt
> can be made to retrieve it.
>
> Having gone through this dissertation, I don't see how it can hurt to lock the queue when
> it is being accessed and would certainly make things bullet proof. What is your opinion?
In that case, let's keep it simple (no mutex) and add a assert(bql_locked())
statement where we think the bql should be protecting access to shared
resources.
Thanks,
C.
On 5/26/25 4:43 AM, Cédric Le Goater wrote:
> On 5/22/25 20:55, Anthony Krowiak wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On 5/22/25 9:30 AM, Cédric Le Goater wrote:
>>> On 5/12/25 20:02, Rorie Reyes wrote:
>>>> These functions can be invoked by the function that handles
>>>> interception
>>>> of the CHSC SEI instruction for requests indicating the
>>>> accessibility of
>>>> one or more adjunct processors has changed.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Rorie Reyes <rreyes@linux.ibm.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> hw/vfio/ap.c | 39
>>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>> include/hw/s390x/ap-bridge.h | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++
>>>> 2 files changed, 61 insertions(+)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/hw/vfio/ap.c b/hw/vfio/ap.c
>>>> index 5ea5dd9cca..4f88f80c54 100644
>>>> --- a/hw/vfio/ap.c
>>>> +++ b/hw/vfio/ap.c
>>>> @@ -96,6 +96,45 @@ static void
>>>> vfio_ap_cfg_chg_notifier_handler(void *opaque)
>>>> }
>>>> +int ap_chsc_sei_nt0_get_event(void *res)
>>>> +{
>>>> + ChscSeiNt0Res *nt0_res = (ChscSeiNt0Res *)res;
>>>> + APConfigChgEvent *cfg_chg_event;
>>>> +
>>>> + if (!ap_chsc_sei_nt0_have_event()) {
>>>> + return 1;
>>>> + }
>>>> +
>>>> + cfg_chg_event = QTAILQ_FIRST(&cfg_chg_events);
>>>> + memset(nt0_res, 0, sizeof(*nt0_res));
>>>> +
>>>> + QTAILQ_REMOVE(&cfg_chg_events, cfg_chg_event, next);
>>>
>>> btw, I don't know if this was discussed. Are we OK to manipulate the
>>> 'cfg_chg_events' construct withou locking ?
>>
>> This has never been discussed, but it's an interesting question. The
>> ap_chsc_sei_nt0_get_event and ap_chsc_sei_nt0_have_event functions
>> are called as a result of a SIE exit to handle interception of a
>> CHSC SEI instruction. Handling of the intercepted instructions is
>> done under the Big QEMU Lock (see kvm_arch_handle_exit in
>> target/s390x/kvm/kvm.c),
>> so presumably no other processes will get access to these functions
>> until the instruction is handled.
>>
>> On the other hand, the vfio_cfg_chg_notifier_handler function that
>> handles the eventfd
>> indicating the guest's AP configuration has been changed by the host
>> device driver
>> adds APConfigChgEvent objects to this queue. If, however, you think
>> about the flow,
>> when the notifier handler gets called to handle an AP config changed
>> event, it
>> queues a channel request word (CRW) indicating there is an SEI
>> pending. Consequently,
>> the ap_chsc_sei_nt0_get_event and ap_chsc_sei_nt0_have_event
>> functions will get called
>> only after the guest receives the CRW event and executes the CHSC SEI
>> instruction. Since
>> the Big QEMU Lock is taken when the CHSC SE instruction is
>> intercepted, it can not proceed
>> until whatever the holding process releases it; so for that flow, it
>> seems highly likely if not
>> impossible for conflict given the event will always be added to the
>> queue before an attempt
>> can be made to retrieve it.
>>
>> Having gone through this dissertation, I don't see how it can hurt to
>> lock the queue when
>> it is being accessed and would certainly make things bullet proof.
>> What is your opinion?
>
> In that case, let's keep it simple (no mutex) and add a
> assert(bql_locked())
> statement where we think the bql should be protecting access to shared
I don't think we want to do that in the vfio_cfg_chg_notifier_handler
function because
that function is called when the host device driver signals an eventfd
to notify
userspace that the guest's AP configuration has been changed and I don't
think the
Big QEMU Lock is taken during that process.
> resources.
>
> Thanks,
>
> C.
>
On 5/22/25 9:30 AM, Cédric Le Goater wrote:
> On 5/12/25 20:02, Rorie Reyes wrote:
>> These functions can be invoked by the function that handles interception
>> of the CHSC SEI instruction for requests indicating the accessibility of
>> one or more adjunct processors has changed.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Rorie Reyes <rreyes@linux.ibm.com>
>> ---
>> hw/vfio/ap.c | 39 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> include/hw/s390x/ap-bridge.h | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++
>> 2 files changed, 61 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/hw/vfio/ap.c b/hw/vfio/ap.c
>> index 5ea5dd9cca..4f88f80c54 100644
>> --- a/hw/vfio/ap.c
>> +++ b/hw/vfio/ap.c
>> @@ -96,6 +96,45 @@ static void vfio_ap_cfg_chg_notifier_handler(void
>> *opaque)
>> }
>> +int ap_chsc_sei_nt0_get_event(void *res)
>> +{
>> + ChscSeiNt0Res *nt0_res = (ChscSeiNt0Res *)res;
>> + APConfigChgEvent *cfg_chg_event;
>> +
>> + if (!ap_chsc_sei_nt0_have_event()) {
>> + return 1;
>> + }
>> +
>> + cfg_chg_event = QTAILQ_FIRST(&cfg_chg_events);
>> + memset(nt0_res, 0, sizeof(*nt0_res));
>> +
>> + QTAILQ_REMOVE(&cfg_chg_events, cfg_chg_event, next);
>
> btw, I don't know if this was discussed. Are we OK to manipulate the
> 'cfg_chg_events' construct withou locking ?
>
I don't think it was discussed. Since I made it static, should we think
about locking the construct? If so, would using 'static QemuMutex
cfg_chg_events_lock;' to declare it and use 'qemu_mutex_lock()' and
'qemu_mutex_unlock()' to lock and unlock when needed? Tony, do you have
any thoughts on this process?
>> diff --git a/include/hw/s390x/ap-bridge.h b/include/hw/s390x/ap-bridge.h
>> index 470e439a98..f4d838bf99 100644
>> --- a/include/hw/s390x/ap-bridge.h
>> +++ b/include/hw/s390x/ap-bridge.h
>> @@ -16,4 +16,26 @@
>> void s390_init_ap(void);
>> +typedef struct ChscSeiNt0Res {
>> + uint16_t length;
>> + uint16_t code;
>> + uint8_t reserved1;
>> + uint16_t reserved2;
>> + uint8_t nt;
>> +#define PENDING_EVENT_INFO_BITMASK 0x80;
>> + uint8_t flags;
>> + uint8_t reserved3;
>> + uint8_t rs;
>> + uint8_t cc;
>> +} QEMU_PACKED ChscSeiNt0Res;
>> +
>> +#define NT0_RES_RESPONSE_CODE 1;
>> +#define NT0_RES_NT_DEFAULT 0;
>> +#define NT0_RES_RS_AP_CHANGE 5;
>> +#define NT0_RES_CC_AP_CHANGE 3;
>
>
>
> please drop the ending ';'
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> C.
>
Will drop in the next version
On 5/22/25 1:17 PM, Rorie Reyes wrote:
>
> On 5/22/25 9:30 AM, Cédric Le Goater wrote:
>> On 5/12/25 20:02, Rorie Reyes wrote:
>>> These functions can be invoked by the function that handles
>>> interception
>>> of the CHSC SEI instruction for requests indicating the
>>> accessibility of
>>> one or more adjunct processors has changed.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Rorie Reyes <rreyes@linux.ibm.com>
>>> ---
>>> hw/vfio/ap.c | 39
>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>> include/hw/s390x/ap-bridge.h | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++
>>> 2 files changed, 61 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/hw/vfio/ap.c b/hw/vfio/ap.c
>>> index 5ea5dd9cca..4f88f80c54 100644
>>> --- a/hw/vfio/ap.c
>>> +++ b/hw/vfio/ap.c
>>> @@ -96,6 +96,45 @@ static void vfio_ap_cfg_chg_notifier_handler(void
>>> *opaque)
>>> }
>>> +int ap_chsc_sei_nt0_get_event(void *res)
>>> +{
>>> + ChscSeiNt0Res *nt0_res = (ChscSeiNt0Res *)res;
>>> + APConfigChgEvent *cfg_chg_event;
>>> +
>>> + if (!ap_chsc_sei_nt0_have_event()) {
>>> + return 1;
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> + cfg_chg_event = QTAILQ_FIRST(&cfg_chg_events);
>>> + memset(nt0_res, 0, sizeof(*nt0_res));
>>> +
>>> + QTAILQ_REMOVE(&cfg_chg_events, cfg_chg_event, next);
>>
>> btw, I don't know if this was discussed. Are we OK to manipulate the
>> 'cfg_chg_events' construct withou locking ?
>>
> I don't think it was discussed. Since I made it static, should we
> think about locking the construct? If so, would using 'static
> QemuMutex cfg_chg_events_lock;' to declare it and use
> 'qemu_mutex_lock()' and 'qemu_mutex_unlock()' to lock and unlock when
> needed? Tony, do you have any thoughts on this process?
See my response to Cedric. If you decide to go with locking, I don't
have a problem with using QemuMutex.
>
>>> diff --git a/include/hw/s390x/ap-bridge.h
>>> b/include/hw/s390x/ap-bridge.h
>>> index 470e439a98..f4d838bf99 100644
>>> --- a/include/hw/s390x/ap-bridge.h
>>> +++ b/include/hw/s390x/ap-bridge.h
>>> @@ -16,4 +16,26 @@
>>> void s390_init_ap(void);
>>> +typedef struct ChscSeiNt0Res {
>>> + uint16_t length;
>>> + uint16_t code;
>>> + uint8_t reserved1;
>>> + uint16_t reserved2;
>>> + uint8_t nt;
>>> +#define PENDING_EVENT_INFO_BITMASK 0x80;
>>> + uint8_t flags;
>>> + uint8_t reserved3;
>>> + uint8_t rs;
>>> + uint8_t cc;
>>> +} QEMU_PACKED ChscSeiNt0Res;
>>> +
>>> +#define NT0_RES_RESPONSE_CODE 1;
>>> +#define NT0_RES_NT_DEFAULT 0;
>>> +#define NT0_RES_RS_AP_CHANGE 5;
>>> +#define NT0_RES_CC_AP_CHANGE 3;
>>
>>
>>
>> please drop the ending ';'
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> C.
>>
> Will drop in the next version
On 5/12/25 2:02 PM, Rorie Reyes wrote:
> These functions can be invoked by the function that handles interception
> of the CHSC SEI instruction for requests indicating the accessibility of
> one or more adjunct processors has changed.
>
> Signed-off-by: Rorie Reyes <rreyes@linux.ibm.com>
Reviewed-by: Anthony Krowiak <akrowiak@linux.ibm.com>
> ---
> hw/vfio/ap.c | 39 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> include/hw/s390x/ap-bridge.h | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++
> 2 files changed, 61 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/hw/vfio/ap.c b/hw/vfio/ap.c
> index 5ea5dd9cca..4f88f80c54 100644
> --- a/hw/vfio/ap.c
> +++ b/hw/vfio/ap.c
> @@ -96,6 +96,45 @@ static void vfio_ap_cfg_chg_notifier_handler(void *opaque)
>
> }
>
> +int ap_chsc_sei_nt0_get_event(void *res)
> +{
> + ChscSeiNt0Res *nt0_res = (ChscSeiNt0Res *)res;
> + APConfigChgEvent *cfg_chg_event;
> +
> + if (!ap_chsc_sei_nt0_have_event()) {
> + return 1;
> + }
> +
> + cfg_chg_event = QTAILQ_FIRST(&cfg_chg_events);
> + memset(nt0_res, 0, sizeof(*nt0_res));
> +
> + QTAILQ_REMOVE(&cfg_chg_events, cfg_chg_event, next);
> + g_free(cfg_chg_event);
> +
> + /*
> + * If there are any AP configuration change events in the queue,
> + * indicate to the caller that there is pending event info in
> + * the response block
> + */
> + if (ap_chsc_sei_nt0_have_event()) {
> + nt0_res->flags |= PENDING_EVENT_INFO_BITMASK;
> + }
> +
> + nt0_res->length = sizeof(ChscSeiNt0Res);
> + nt0_res->code = NT0_RES_RESPONSE_CODE;
> + nt0_res->nt = NT0_RES_NT_DEFAULT;
> + nt0_res->rs = NT0_RES_RS_AP_CHANGE;
> + nt0_res->cc = NT0_RES_CC_AP_CHANGE;
> +
> + return 0;
> +
> +}
> +
> +int ap_chsc_sei_nt0_have_event(void)
> +{
> + return !QTAILQ_EMPTY(&cfg_chg_events);
> +}
> +
> static bool vfio_ap_register_irq_notifier(VFIOAPDevice *vapdev,
> unsigned int irq, Error **errp)
> {
> diff --git a/include/hw/s390x/ap-bridge.h b/include/hw/s390x/ap-bridge.h
> index 470e439a98..f4d838bf99 100644
> --- a/include/hw/s390x/ap-bridge.h
> +++ b/include/hw/s390x/ap-bridge.h
> @@ -16,4 +16,26 @@
>
> void s390_init_ap(void);
>
> +typedef struct ChscSeiNt0Res {
> + uint16_t length;
> + uint16_t code;
> + uint8_t reserved1;
> + uint16_t reserved2;
> + uint8_t nt;
> +#define PENDING_EVENT_INFO_BITMASK 0x80;
> + uint8_t flags;
> + uint8_t reserved3;
> + uint8_t rs;
> + uint8_t cc;
> +} QEMU_PACKED ChscSeiNt0Res;
> +
> +#define NT0_RES_RESPONSE_CODE 1;
> +#define NT0_RES_NT_DEFAULT 0;
> +#define NT0_RES_RS_AP_CHANGE 5;
> +#define NT0_RES_CC_AP_CHANGE 3;
> +
> +int ap_chsc_sei_nt0_get_event(void *res);
> +
> +int ap_chsc_sei_nt0_have_event(void);
> +
> #endif
© 2016 - 2025 Red Hat, Inc.