Re: [PATCH] KVM: s390: generate kvm hypercall functions

Christian Borntraeger
2021-07-13T15:59:27Z

On 13.07.21 17:52, Heiko Carstens wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 13, 2021 at 05:41:33PM +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
>> On 13.07.21 16:57, Heiko Carstens wrote:
>> [..]
>>> +#define HYPERCALL_FMT_0
>>> +#define HYPERCALL_FMT_1 , "0" (r2)
>>> +#define HYPERCALL_FMT_2 , "d" (r3) HYPERCALL_FMT_1
>>> +#define HYPERCALL_FMT_3 , "d" (r4) HYPERCALL_FMT_2
>>> +#define HYPERCALL_FMT_4 , "d" (r5) HYPERCALL_FMT_3
>>> +#define HYPERCALL_FMT_5 , "d" (r6) HYPERCALL_FMT_4
>>> +#define HYPERCALL_FMT_6 , "d" (r7) HYPERCALL_FMT_5
>>
>> This will result in reverse order.
>> old:
>> "d" (__nr), "0" (__p1), "d" (__p2), "d" (__p3), "d" (__p4), "d" (__p5), "d" (__p6)
>> new:
>> "d"(__nr), "d"(r7), "d"(r6), "d"(r5), "d"(r4), "d"(r3), "0"(r2)
>>
>> As we do not reference the variable in the asm this should not matter,
>> I just noticed it when comparing the result of the preprocessed files.
>>
>> Assuming that we do not care this looks good.
>
> Yes, it does not matter. Please let me know if should change it anyway.

No, I think this is ok.
Shall I take it via the kvm tree or do you want to take it via the s390 tree?
For that
Acked-by: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>