Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/29] powerpc/rtas: complete ibm,suspend-me status codes

From: Nathan Lynch <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 04 Dec 2020 08:40:14 -0600

Michael Ellerman <[email-masked]> writes:
> Nathan Lynch <[email-masked]> writes:
>> We don't completely account for the possible return codes for
>> ibm,suspend-me. Add definitions for these.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Nathan Lynch <[email-masked]>
>> ---
>>  arch/powerpc/include/asm/rtas.h | 7 ++++++-
>>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/rtas.h b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/rtas.h
>> index 55f9a154c95d..f060181a0d32 100644
>> --- a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/rtas.h
>> +++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/rtas.h
>> @@ -23,11 +23,16 @@
>>  #define RTAS_RMOBUF_MAX (64 * 1024)
>>  
>>  /* RTAS return status codes */
>> -#define RTAS_NOT_SUSPENDABLE	-9004
>>  #define RTAS_BUSY		-2    /* RTAS Busy */
>>  #define RTAS_EXTENDED_DELAY_MIN	9900
>>  #define RTAS_EXTENDED_DELAY_MAX	9905
>>  
>> +/* statuses specific to ibm,suspend-me */
>> +#define RTAS_SUSPEND_ABORTED     9000 /* Suspension aborted */
>
> This made me ... pause.
>
> But it really is positive 9000, I checked PAPR.

Yes, 9000 falls within the "vendor-specific success codes" range in the
RTAS status value table. I guess aborting a suspend is
operator-initiated and it's not considered an error condition from that
point of view.