[Restored cc:s] On Tue, 26 Sep 2017 12:45:11 +0200 Halil Pasic <pa...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> On 09/26/2017 12:18 PM, Cornelia Huck wrote: > > On Thu, 21 Sep 2017 20:08:36 +0200 > > Halil Pasic <pa...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote: > > > >> Abstract > >> -------- > >> > >> The objective of this series is introducing CCW IDA (indirect data > >> access) support to our virtual channel subsystem implementation. Briefly > >> CCW IDA can be thought of as a kind of a scatter gather support for a > >> single CCW. If certain flags are set, the cda is to be interpreted as an > >> address to a list which in turn holds further addresses designating the > >> actual data. Thus the scheme which we are currently using for accessing > >> CCW payload does not work in general case. Currently there is no > >> immediate need for proper IDA handling (no use case), but since it IDA is > >> a non-optional part of the architecture, the only way towards AR > >> compliance is actually implementing IDA. > >> > >> The focus of this patch set is introducing IDA support. There seems to be > >> a potential for further improvements based on the introduced > >> infrastructure, but such improvements are intended to be discusses > >> separately and realized as patches on top of this series. > > > > Hm, do you have a list of what you want to do as follow-on patches? > > (Checking return codes, ...) > > > > It's easy to lose track of all this :) > > > > These are the stuff I had in mind: > * handling errors (aka. checking error codes) in virtio-ccw > * using residual count > * converting 3270 (patches already sent) The 3270 stuff is next in line for me. > > And then some related stuff is the error reporting and handling > rework for the IO instruction handlers and for the ccw interpretation > emulation (later affects CcwDataStream). > > There is probably a lot of potential for making things prettier > in virtio-ccw.c too -- I've done some experiments but ended up changing > too many things at the same time. There's always potential for such things :) Let's get the previously identified stuff out of the door first (it's not that I lack patches to apply anyway...) > > Btw, do we still have open issues with this series? Currently going through my acceptance testing.