On 10/20/2017 03:00 PM, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> On Thu, 19 Oct 2017 18:39:37 +0200
> Halil Pasic <pa...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>
>> On 09/15/2017 09:27 AM, Cornelia Huck wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> + DEFINE_PROP_UINT8("chpid_type", CcwTesterDevice, chpid_type,
>>>>>> + 0x98),
>>> This might also need re-evaluation - we should not really need a new
>>> chpid type.
>>>
>>
>> I'm back at ccw-tester again (for v2). I've realized we did not agree
>> on what to use here (chpid_type). Shall I use 0x25 (Fibre Channel) or
>> EMULATED_CCW_3270_CHPID_TYPE, or even 0x32 (virtio-ccw) as a default
>> value? And should EMULATED_CCW_3270_CHPID_TYPE be called like that
>> (is it really supposed to be specific to 3270?
>>
>> Sorry I did not notice sooner.
>
> It might make sense to pick whatever z/VM commonly uses for emulated
> devices. (Or ask them if they reserved something explicitly for testing
> -- that would be an even better match.)
>
OK, I will approach the z/VM guys. About EMULATED_CCW_3270_CHPID_TYPE,
does it really make sense to have a separate chpid type for 3270? (You
have missed that question, so I'm asking it again).
Halil
