On 10/19/2017 08:11 AM, Dong Jia Shi wrote:
>> +if (!sch || !css_subch_visible(sch)) {
>> +setcc(cpu, 3);
> ?:
> s/3/IOINST_CC_NOT_OPERATIONAL/
>
> This also applies to other alike cases.
>
I do not know. My first reaction was that I'm against because
were IOInstEnding strongly typ
* Halil Pasic [2017-10-17 16:04:50 +0200]:
> Simplify the error handling of the XSCH. Let the code detecting the
> condition tell (in a less ambiguous way) how it's to be handled. No
> changes in behavior.
>
> Signed-off-by: Halil Pasic
> ---
> hw/s390x/css.c | 17 +
>
On 17.10.2017 16:04, Halil Pasic wrote:
> Simplify the error handling of the XSCH. Let the code detecting the
> condition tell (in a less ambiguous way) how it's to be handled. No
> changes in behavior.
>
> Signed-off-by: Halil Pasic
> ---
> hw/s390x/css.c | 17 +
> incl
On Tue, 17 Oct 2017 16:04:50 +0200
Halil Pasic wrote:
> Simplify the error handling of the XSCH. Let the code detecting the
> condition tell (in a less ambiguous way) how it's to be handled. No
> changes in behavior.
>
> Signed-off-by: Halil Pasic
> ---
> hw/s390x/css.c | 17 +
Simplify the error handling of the XSCH. Let the code detecting the
condition tell (in a less ambiguous way) how it's to be handled. No
changes in behavior.
Signed-off-by: Halil Pasic
---
hw/s390x/css.c | 17 +
include/hw/s390x/css.h | 2 +-
target/s390x/ioinst.c | 23
