On 07/05/2017 12:20 PM, Christian Borntraeger wrote: > On 07/04/2017 04:51 PM, Halil Pasic wrote: >> >> >> On 07/04/2017 04:37 PM, Cornelia Huck wrote: >>> On Tue, 4 Jul 2017 16:07:56 +0200 >>> Christian Borntraeger <borntrae...@de.ibm.com> wrote: >>> >>>> From: Halil Pasic <pa...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> >>>> >>>> Commit f6f4ce4211 ("s390x: add property adapter_routes_max_batch", >>>> 2016-12-09) introduces a common realize (intended to be common for all >>>> the subclasses) for flic, but fails to make sure the kvm-flic which had >>>> it's own is actually calling this common realize. >>> >>> s/it's/its/ >>> >> >> Valid. Sorry. >> >>>> >>>> This omission fortunately does not result in a grave problem. The common >>>> realize was only supposed to catch a possible programming mistake by >>>> validating a value of a property set via the compat machine macros. Since >>>> there was no programming mistake we don't need this fixed for stable. >>>> >>>> Let's fix this problem by making sure kvm flic honors the realize of its >>>> parent class. >>>> >>>> Let us also improve on the error message we would hypothetically emit >>>> when the validation fails. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Halil Pasic <pa...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> >>>> Fixes: f6f4ce4211 ("s390x: add property adapter_routes_max_batch") >>>> Reviewed-by: Dong Jia Shi <bjsdj...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> >>>> Reviewed-by: Yi Min Zhao <zyi...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> >>>> Signed-off-by: Christian Borntraeger <borntrae...@de.ibm.com> >>>> --- >>>> hw/intc/s390_flic.c | 4 ++-- >>>> hw/intc/s390_flic_kvm.c | 17 +++++++++++++++++ >>>> 2 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/hw/intc/s390_flic.c b/hw/intc/s390_flic.c >>>> index a99a350..837158b 100644 >>>> --- a/hw/intc/s390_flic.c >>>> +++ b/hw/intc/s390_flic.c >>>> @@ -101,8 +101,8 @@ static void s390_flic_common_realize(DeviceState *dev, >>>> Error **errp) >>>> uint32_t max_batch = S390_FLIC_COMMON(dev)->adapter_routes_max_batch; >>>> >>>> if (max_batch > ADAPTER_ROUTES_MAX_GSI) { >>>> - error_setg(errp, "flic adapter_routes_max_batch too big" >>>> - "%d (%d allowed)", max_batch, ADAPTER_ROUTES_MAX_GSI); >>>> + error_setg(errp, "flic property adapter_routes_max_batch too big" >>>> + " (%d > %d)", max_batch, ADAPTER_ROUTES_MAX_GSI); >>> >>> Unrelated message change? >>> >> >> I've mentioned it in the commit message. It was also introduced by the >> patch I'm fixing. But yes strictly it's two different problems. > > I will only fix the patch description ( s/it's/its/) and keep the other things > unchanged. Is that fine with you?
It's fine with me, but I guess you probably asked Connie. Thanks!