From: Claudio Imbrenda <imbrenda@linux.ibm.com>
To: Nina Schoetterl-Glausch <nsg@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: "Nico Böhr" <nrb@linux.ibm.com>, "Thomas Huth" <thuth@redhat.com>,
"Janosch Frank" <frankja@linux.ibm.com>,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org,
"Andrew Jones" <andrew.jones@linux.dev>,
"David Hildenbrand" <david@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [kvm-unit-tests PATCH 3/5] s390x: Add library functions for exiting from snippet
Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2023 13:37:31 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20231215133731.006e9510@p-imbrenda> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <b61da0ed88a86d0823ac26d72f9914a7c392b415.camel@linux.ibm.com>
On Thu, 14 Dec 2023 21:02:53 +0100
Nina Schoetterl-Glausch <nsg@linux.ibm.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 2023-12-13 at 17:42 +0100, Claudio Imbrenda wrote:
> > On Wed, 13 Dec 2023 13:49:40 +0100
> > Nina Schoetterl-Glausch <nsg@linux.ibm.com> wrote:
> >
> > > It is useful to be able to force an exit to the host from the snippet,
> > > as well as do so while returning a value.
> > > Add this functionality, also add helper functions for the host to check
> > > for an exit and get or check the value.
> > > Use diag 0x44 and 0x9c for this.
> > > Add a guest specific snippet header file and rename the host's.
> >
> > you should also mention here that you are splitting snippet.h into a
> > host-only part and a guest-only part
>
> Well, I'm not splitting anything. Is it not clear that "the host's"
> refers to snippet.h?
>
> How about:
> Add a guest specific snippet header file and rename snippet.h to reflect
> that it is host specific.
sounds good
[...]
> > > diff --git a/lib/s390x/sie.c b/lib/s390x/sie.c
> > > index 40936bd2..908b0130 100644
> > > --- a/lib/s390x/sie.c
> > > +++ b/lib/s390x/sie.c
> > > @@ -42,6 +42,34 @@ void sie_check_validity(struct vm *vm, uint16_t vir_exp)
> > > report(vir_exp == vir, "VALIDITY: %x", vir);
> > > }
> > >
> > > +bool sie_is_diag_icpt(struct vm *vm, unsigned int diag)
> > > +{
> > > + uint32_t ipb = vm->sblk->ipb;
> > > + uint64_t code;
> >
> > uint64_t code = 0;
> >
> > > + uint16_t displace;
> > > + uint8_t base;
> > > + bool ret = true;
> >
> > bool ret;
> >
> > > +
> > > + ret = ret && vm->sblk->icptcode == ICPT_INST;
> > > + ret = ret && (vm->sblk->ipa & 0xff00) == 0x8300;
> >
something like this:
assert(diag == 0x44 || diag == 0x9c);
if (vm->sblk->icptcode != ICPT_INST)
return false;
if ((vm->sblk->ipa & 0xff00) != 0x8300)
return false;
if (vm->sblk->ipb & 0xffff)
return false;
code = ....
return code == diag;
> > ret = vm->sblk->icptcode == ICPT_INST && (vm->sblk->ipa & 0xff00) ==
> > 0x8300;
>
> (*) see below
> >
> > > + switch (diag) {
> > > + case 0x44:
> > > + case 0x9c:
> > > + ret = ret && !(ipb & 0xffff);
> > > + ipb >>= 16;
> > > + displace = ipb & 0xfff;
> >
> > maybe it's more readable to avoid shifting thigs around all the time:
>
> I don't know, now I gotta be able to do rudimentary arithmetic :D
> I don't really have a preference.
> I wonder if defining a bit field would be worth it.
I think it would.
maybe something like:
union ip_text {
struct {
unsigned long ipa:16;
unsigned long ipb:32;
};
struct {
unsigned long opcode:8;
...
};
}
then you can do this at the beginning of the function:
union ip_text ip = { .ipa = vm->sblk->ipa, .ipb = ... };
and then use only the bitfields
[...]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-12-15 13:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-12-13 12:49 [kvm-unit-tests PATCH 0/5] s390x: STFLE nested interpretation Nina Schoetterl-Glausch
2023-12-13 12:49 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH 1/5] lib: Add pseudo random functions Nina Schoetterl-Glausch
2023-12-13 13:38 ` Andrew Jones
2023-12-13 17:43 ` Nina Schoetterl-Glausch
2023-12-13 17:53 ` Andrew Jones
2023-12-13 12:49 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH 2/5] s390x: lib: Remove double include Nina Schoetterl-Glausch
2023-12-13 16:42 ` Claudio Imbrenda
2023-12-13 12:49 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH 3/5] s390x: Add library functions for exiting from snippet Nina Schoetterl-Glausch
2023-12-13 16:42 ` Claudio Imbrenda
2023-12-14 20:02 ` Nina Schoetterl-Glausch
2023-12-15 12:37 ` Claudio Imbrenda [this message]
2023-12-13 12:49 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH 4/5] s390x: Use library functions for snippet exit Nina Schoetterl-Glausch
2023-12-13 16:45 ` Claudio Imbrenda
2023-12-15 11:50 ` Nina Schoetterl-Glausch
2023-12-15 13:53 ` Claudio Imbrenda
2023-12-13 12:49 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH 5/5] s390x: Add test for STFLE interpretive execution (format-0) Nina Schoetterl-Glausch
2023-12-13 17:00 ` Claudio Imbrenda
2023-12-13 17:31 ` Nina Schoetterl-Glausch
2023-12-14 10:18 ` Nina Schoetterl-Glausch
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20231215133731.006e9510@p-imbrenda \
--to=imbrenda@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=andrew.jones@linux.dev \
--cc=david@redhat.com \
--cc=frankja@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nrb@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=nsg@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=thuth@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox