* [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v1] s390x: spec_ex: load full register
@ 2023-08-11 11:29 Nico Boehr
2023-08-11 12:02 ` Claudio Imbrenda
` (2 more replies)
0 siblings, 3 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Nico Boehr @ 2023-08-11 11:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: frankja, imbrenda, thuth, nsg; +Cc: kvm, linux-s390
There may be contents left in the upper 32 bits of executed_addr; hence
we should use a 64-bit load to make sure they are overwritten.
Signed-off-by: Nico Boehr <nrb@linux.ibm.com>
---
s390x/spec_ex.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/s390x/spec_ex.c b/s390x/spec_ex.c
index e3dd85dcb153..72b942576369 100644
--- a/s390x/spec_ex.c
+++ b/s390x/spec_ex.c
@@ -142,7 +142,7 @@ static int psw_odd_address(void)
" larl %%r1,0f\n"
" stg %%r1,%[fixup_addr]\n"
" lpswe %[odd_psw]\n"
- "0: lr %[executed_addr],%%r0\n"
+ "0: lgr %[executed_addr],%%r0\n"
: [fixup_addr] "=&T" (fixup_psw.addr),
[executed_addr] "=d" (executed_addr)
: [odd_psw] "Q" (odd)
--
2.41.0
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread* Re: [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v1] s390x: spec_ex: load full register
2023-08-11 11:29 [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v1] s390x: spec_ex: load full register Nico Boehr
@ 2023-08-11 12:02 ` Claudio Imbrenda
2023-08-14 10:23 ` Thomas Huth
2023-08-22 7:26 ` Janosch Frank
2 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Claudio Imbrenda @ 2023-08-11 12:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Nico Boehr; +Cc: frankja, thuth, nsg, kvm, linux-s390
On Fri, 11 Aug 2023 13:29:36 +0200
Nico Boehr <nrb@linux.ibm.com> wrote:
> There may be contents left in the upper 32 bits of executed_addr; hence
> we should use a 64-bit load to make sure they are overwritten.
>
> Signed-off-by: Nico Boehr <nrb@linux.ibm.com>
Reviewed-by: Claudio Imbrenda <imbrenda@linux.ibm.com>
> ---
> s390x/spec_ex.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/s390x/spec_ex.c b/s390x/spec_ex.c
> index e3dd85dcb153..72b942576369 100644
> --- a/s390x/spec_ex.c
> +++ b/s390x/spec_ex.c
> @@ -142,7 +142,7 @@ static int psw_odd_address(void)
> " larl %%r1,0f\n"
> " stg %%r1,%[fixup_addr]\n"
> " lpswe %[odd_psw]\n"
> - "0: lr %[executed_addr],%%r0\n"
> + "0: lgr %[executed_addr],%%r0\n"
> : [fixup_addr] "=&T" (fixup_psw.addr),
> [executed_addr] "=d" (executed_addr)
> : [odd_psw] "Q" (odd)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v1] s390x: spec_ex: load full register
2023-08-11 11:29 [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v1] s390x: spec_ex: load full register Nico Boehr
2023-08-11 12:02 ` Claudio Imbrenda
@ 2023-08-14 10:23 ` Thomas Huth
2023-08-22 7:26 ` Janosch Frank
2 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Huth @ 2023-08-14 10:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Nico Boehr, frankja, imbrenda, nsg; +Cc: kvm, linux-s390
On 11/08/2023 13.29, Nico Boehr wrote:
> There may be contents left in the upper 32 bits of executed_addr; hence
> we should use a 64-bit load to make sure they are overwritten.
>
> Signed-off-by: Nico Boehr <nrb@linux.ibm.com>
> ---
> s390x/spec_ex.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/s390x/spec_ex.c b/s390x/spec_ex.c
> index e3dd85dcb153..72b942576369 100644
> --- a/s390x/spec_ex.c
> +++ b/s390x/spec_ex.c
> @@ -142,7 +142,7 @@ static int psw_odd_address(void)
> " larl %%r1,0f\n"
> " stg %%r1,%[fixup_addr]\n"
> " lpswe %[odd_psw]\n"
> - "0: lr %[executed_addr],%%r0\n"
> + "0: lgr %[executed_addr],%%r0\n"
> : [fixup_addr] "=&T" (fixup_psw.addr),
> [executed_addr] "=d" (executed_addr)
> : [odd_psw] "Q" (odd)
Reviewed-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v1] s390x: spec_ex: load full register
2023-08-11 11:29 [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v1] s390x: spec_ex: load full register Nico Boehr
2023-08-11 12:02 ` Claudio Imbrenda
2023-08-14 10:23 ` Thomas Huth
@ 2023-08-22 7:26 ` Janosch Frank
2 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Janosch Frank @ 2023-08-22 7:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Nico Boehr, imbrenda, thuth, nsg; +Cc: kvm, linux-s390
On 8/11/23 13:29, Nico Boehr wrote:
> There may be contents left in the upper 32 bits of executed_addr; hence
> we should use a 64-bit load to make sure they are overwritten.
>
> Signed-off-by: Nico Boehr <nrb@linux.ibm.com>
I've pushed this to devel since it seems you didn't do that yourself.
> ---
> s390x/spec_ex.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/s390x/spec_ex.c b/s390x/spec_ex.c
> index e3dd85dcb153..72b942576369 100644
> --- a/s390x/spec_ex.c
> +++ b/s390x/spec_ex.c
> @@ -142,7 +142,7 @@ static int psw_odd_address(void)
> " larl %%r1,0f\n"
> " stg %%r1,%[fixup_addr]\n"
> " lpswe %[odd_psw]\n"
> - "0: lr %[executed_addr],%%r0\n"
> + "0: lgr %[executed_addr],%%r0\n"
> : [fixup_addr] "=&T" (fixup_psw.addr),
> [executed_addr] "=d" (executed_addr)
> : [odd_psw] "Q" (odd)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2023-08-22 7:26 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2023-08-11 11:29 [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v1] s390x: spec_ex: load full register Nico Boehr
2023-08-11 12:02 ` Claudio Imbrenda
2023-08-14 10:23 ` Thomas Huth
2023-08-22 7:26 ` Janosch Frank
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox