From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-15.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER,INCLUDES_PATCH, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A93DC4361B for ; Thu, 17 Dec 2020 15:34:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D7D082396F for ; Thu, 17 Dec 2020 15:34:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727394AbgLQPek (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Dec 2020 10:34:40 -0500 Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.156.1]:28964 "EHLO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727303AbgLQPej (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Dec 2020 10:34:39 -0500 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098393.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 0BHFWkKO040349; Thu, 17 Dec 2020 10:33:59 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ibm.com; h=subject : from : to : cc : references : message-id : date : mime-version : in-reply-to : content-type : content-transfer-encoding; s=pp1; bh=vHlNjyXMMQvTCuD9VFc8TD1VEhb2PMJmQrpPlRgS62M=; b=MvqmG13DFpv2bExOuLfEn9O1hK8unAyyoUELxWrcwqh3aZlQyCl0q7F8eZ2AbRh9Nifx VCEPwA7sefNIf0YJF/btDoFFm7E18WQExTyMt7HPLj/Nf/8+GdptYIXImFuCKum/049D jyfGIBdJmVnElSLw39VR7ZPcDIK6AwmtwVaLk8TeendNt2r6XD4mDwZzDRDZElPDnMIl Ve5mkgdrrjvStI76Sct62S0GooDjdCZ6/lQkeOhIxf9d67T/VhhLOsTyFZEQWFR6SdlR O0N2nyZpx786U00fuxphbdRFATAafl/235cArnGi94ryx701Vc2k9/ANTQGeEazoxIRc Qg== Received: from pps.reinject (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 35g9k117jk-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 17 Dec 2020 10:33:58 -0500 Received: from m0098393.ppops.net (m0098393.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by pps.reinject (8.16.0.36/8.16.0.36) with SMTP id 0BHFXIEd043551; Thu, 17 Dec 2020 10:33:58 -0500 Received: from ppma03fra.de.ibm.com (6b.4a.5195.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [149.81.74.107]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 35g9k117h6-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 17 Dec 2020 10:33:58 -0500 Received: from pps.filterd (ppma03fra.de.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma03fra.de.ibm.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 0BHFR7A6024150; Thu, 17 Dec 2020 15:33:56 GMT Received: from b06cxnps4075.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06relay12.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.109.197]) by ppma03fra.de.ibm.com with ESMTP id 35cng8g55g-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 17 Dec 2020 15:33:55 +0000 Received: from d06av24.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (mk.ibm.com [9.149.105.60]) by b06cxnps4075.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 0BHFVMll25297280 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 17 Dec 2020 15:31:22 GMT Received: from d06av24.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id C9F4342045; Thu, 17 Dec 2020 15:31:22 +0000 (GMT) Received: from d06av24.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6791B42049; Thu, 17 Dec 2020 15:31:22 +0000 (GMT) Received: from localhost.localdomain (unknown [9.145.181.71]) by d06av24.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Thu, 17 Dec 2020 15:31:22 +0000 (GMT) Subject: Re: [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v3 7/8] s390x: Add diag318 intercept test From: Janosch Frank To: Thomas Huth , Christian Borntraeger , kvm@vger.kernel.org Cc: david@redhat.com, imbrenda@linux.ibm.com, cohuck@redhat.com, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org References: <20201211100039.63597-1-frankja@linux.ibm.com> <20201211100039.63597-8-frankja@linux.ibm.com> <4f689585-ae2e-4632-9055-f2332d9f7751@redhat.com> <44d6ac32-f7ac-6b33-ea9e-e037f936a181@de.ibm.com> <24e9883c-22d5-de4f-0001-d271855d7ea3@redhat.com> <23af5bca-dd2c-43bd-b2b4-6c7e2031517f@linux.ibm.com> Message-ID: Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2020 16:31:22 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <23af5bca-dd2c-43bd-b2b4-6c7e2031517f@linux.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.343,18.0.737 definitions=2020-12-17_10:2020-12-15,2020-12-17 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 adultscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 lowpriorityscore=0 bulkscore=0 impostorscore=0 priorityscore=1501 spamscore=0 mlxscore=0 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 clxscore=1015 suspectscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2009150000 definitions=main-2012170106 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: kvm@vger.kernel.org On 12/17/20 3:31 PM, Janosch Frank wrote: > On 12/17/20 11:34 AM, Thomas Huth wrote: >> On 17/12/2020 10.59, Christian Borntraeger wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 17.12.20 10:53, Thomas Huth wrote: >>>> On 11/12/2020 11.00, Janosch Frank wrote: >>>>> Not much to test except for the privilege and specification >>>>> exceptions. >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Janosch Frank >>>>> Reviewed-by: Thomas Huth >>>>> --- >>>>> 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 cf6ea7c..0001993 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 6c86037..58f8e54 100644 >>>>> --- a/lib/s390x/sclp.h >>>>> +++ b/lib/s390x/sclp.h >>>>> @@ -105,7 +105,8 @@ 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 { >>>>> @@ -130,6 +131,9 @@ 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]; >>>> >>>> ... the entries[] array can be moved around here without any further ado? >>>> Looks confusing to me. Should there be a CPUEntry array here at all, or only >>>> in ReadCpuInfo? >>> >>> there is offset_cpu for the cpu entries at the beginning of the structure. >> >> Ah, thanks, right, this was used earlier in the patch series, now I >> remember. But I think the "struct CPUEntry entries[0]" here is rather >> confusing, since there is no guarantee that the entries are really at this >> location ... I think this line should rather be replaced by a comment saying >> that offset_cpu should be used instead. > > Sure, as long as it's clear that there's something at the end, I'm fine > with it. I would add that to the "fix style issues" patch or into an own patch. Any preferences? - struct CPUEntry entries[0]; + /* + * The cpu entries follow, they start at the offset specified + * in offset_cpu. + */ > >> >> Thomas >> >