Re: [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v2 6/7] s390x: Add diag318 intercept test

Janosch Frank
2020-11-30T12:39:49Z

On 11/27/20 5:46 PM, Thomas Huth wrote:
> On 27/11/2020 14.06, Janosch Frank wrote:
>> Not much to test except for the privilege and specification
>> exceptions.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Janosch Frank <frankja@linux.ibm.com>
>> ---
>> lib/s390x/sclp.c | 2 ++
>> lib/s390x/sclp.h | 6 +++++-
>> s390x/intercept.c | 19 +++++++++++++++++++
>> 3 files changed, 26 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/lib/s390x/sclp.c b/lib/s390x/sclp.c
>> index 68833b5..3966086 100644
>> --- a/lib/s390x/sclp.c
>> +++ b/lib/s390x/sclp.c
>> @@ -138,6 +138,8 @@ void sclp_facilities_setup(void)
>>
>> assert(read_info);
>>
>> + sclp_facilities.has_diag318 = read_info->byte_134_diag318;
>> +
>> cpu = (void *)read_info + read_info->offset_cpu;
>> for (i = 0; i < read_info->entries_cpu; i++, cpu++) {
>> if (cpu->address == cpu0_addr) {
>> diff --git a/lib/s390x/sclp.h b/lib/s390x/sclp.h
>> index e18f7e6..4e564dd 100644
>> --- a/lib/s390x/sclp.h
>> +++ b/lib/s390x/sclp.h
>> @@ -108,7 +108,8 @@ extern struct sclp_facilities sclp_facilities;
>>
>> struct sclp_facilities {
>> uint64_t has_sief2 : 1;
>> - uint64_t : 63;
>> + uint64_t has_diag318 : 1;
>> + uint64_t : 62;
>> };
>>
>> typedef struct ReadInfo {
>> @@ -133,6 +134,9 @@ typedef struct ReadInfo {
>> uint16_t highest_cpu;
>> uint8_t _reserved5[124 - 122]; /* 122-123 */
>> uint32_t hmfai;
>> + uint8_t reserved7[134 - 128];
>> + uint8_t byte_134_diag318 : 1;
>> + uint8_t : 7;
>> struct CPUEntry entries[0];
>> } __attribute__((packed)) ReadInfo;
>>
>> diff --git a/s390x/intercept.c b/s390x/intercept.c
>> index 2e38257..615f0a0 100644
>> --- a/s390x/intercept.c
>> +++ b/s390x/intercept.c
>> @@ -10,6 +10,7 @@
>> * under the terms of the GNU Library General Public License version 2.
>> */
>> #include <libcflat.h>
>> +#include <sclp.h>
>> #include <asm/asm-offsets.h>
>> #include <asm/interrupt.h>
>> #include <asm/page.h>
>> @@ -154,6 +155,23 @@ static void test_testblock(void)
>> check_pgm_int_code(PGM_INT_CODE_ADDRESSING);
>> }
>>
>> +static void test_diag318(void)
>> +{
>> + expect_pgm_int();
>> + enter_pstate();
>> + asm volatile("diag %0,0,0x318\n" : : "d" (0x42));
>> + check_pgm_int_code(PGM_INT_CODE_PRIVILEGED_OPERATION);
>> +
>> + if (!sclp_facilities.has_diag318)
>> + expect_pgm_int();
>> +
>> + asm volatile("diag %0,0,0x318\n" : : "d" (0x42));
>> +
>> + if (!sclp_facilities.has_diag318)
>> + check_pgm_int_code(PGM_INT_CODE_SPECIFICATION);
>> +
>
> Maybe remove the empty line above.

Sure

>
>> +}
>> +
>> struct {
>> const char *name;
>> void (*func)(void);
>> @@ -164,6 +182,7 @@ struct {
>> { "stap", test_stap, false },
>> { "stidp", test_stidp, false },
>> { "testblock", test_testblock, false },
>> + { "diag318", test_diag318, false },
>> { NULL, NULL, false }
>> };
>>
>>
>
> Reviewed-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com>

Thanks!

>