Re: [qemu-s390x] [PATCH 2/3] s390x/cpumodel: also change name of vxbeh

[David Hildenbrand]

On 15.07.19 18:12, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> 
> 
> On 15.07.19 17:50, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 15.07.19 17:02, Thomas Huth wrote:
>>> On 15/07/2019 16.23, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
>>>> David suggested to keep everything in sync as 4.1 is not yet released.
>>>> This patch fixes the name "vxbeh" into "vxp".
>>>>
>>>> To simplify the backports this patch will not change VECTOR_BCD_ENH as
>>>> this is just an internal name. That will be done by an extra patch that
>>>> does not need to be backported.
>>>>
>>>> Suggested-by: David Hildenbrand <address@hidden>
>>>> Fixes: d05be57ddc2e ("s390: cpumodel: fix description for the new vector 
>>>> facility")
>>>> Fixes: 54d65de0b525 ("s390x/cpumodel: vector enhancements")
>>>> Signed-off-by: Christian Borntraeger <address@hidden>
>>>> ---
>>>>  target/s390x/cpu_features_def.inc.h | 2 +-
>>>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/target/s390x/cpu_features_def.inc.h 
>>>> b/target/s390x/cpu_features_def.inc.h
>>>> index 3118a9f89228..99f58a89318a 100644
>>>> --- a/target/s390x/cpu_features_def.inc.h
>>>> +++ b/target/s390x/cpu_features_def.inc.h
>>>> @@ -104,7 +104,7 @@ DEF_FEAT(CMM_NT, "cmmnt", STFL, 147, "CMM: 
>>>> ESSA-enhancement (no translate) facil
>>>>  DEF_FEAT(VECTOR_ENH2, "vxeh2", STFL, 148, "Vector Enhancements facility 
>>>> 2")
>>>>  DEF_FEAT(ESORT_BASE, "esort-base", STFL, 150, "Enhanced-sort facility 
>>>> (excluding subfunctions)")
>>>>  DEF_FEAT(DEFLATE_BASE, "deflate-base", STFL, 151, "Deflate-conversion 
>>>> facility (excluding subfunctions)")
>>>> -DEF_FEAT(VECTOR_BCD_ENH, "vxbeh", STFL, 152, 
>>>> "Vector-Packed-Decimal-Enhancement Facility")
>>>> +DEF_FEAT(VECTOR_BCD_ENH, "vxp", STFL, 152, 
>>>> "Vector-Packed-Decimal-Enhancement Facility")
>>>
>>> We already have:
>>>
>>> DEF_FEAT(VECTOR_PACKED_DECIMAL, "vxpd", STFL, 134, "Vector packed decimal 
>>> facility")
>>>
>>> ... so I rather expected something like "vxpde" here instead? Or is there a 
>>> reason
>>>
>> for just using "vxp"?
>>
>> Matching what the Linux kernel has.
>>
>> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/arch/s390/kernel/processor.c?id=a8fd61688dfad6fdce95fa64cacd8a66595697b8
>>>
> 
> Since we differ from the kernel in other places as well we might use 
> something else, of course.
> 

We also have

sortl vs. sort
vxe vs. vxeh
vxe2 vs. vxeh2

So I tend to prefer "vxpde", or rather "vxpdeh".

(all other enhancement facilities have "eh", so we should actually use
"vxpdeh")

-- 

Thanks,

David / dhildenb