From: Janis Schoetterl-Glausch <scgl@linux.ibm.com>
To: Claudio Imbrenda <imbrenda@linux.ibm.com>, kvm@vger.kernel.org
Cc: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, frankja@linux.ibm.com,
pmorel@linux.ibm.com, nrb@linux.ibm.com, thuth@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v1 2/2] lib: s390x: better smp interrupt checks
Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2022 12:01:11 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5552dc4a-4c1f-2f01-eaa7-fa42042d4455@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220603154037.103733-3-imbrenda@linux.ibm.com>
On 6/3/22 17:40, Claudio Imbrenda wrote:
> Use per-CPU flags and callbacks for Program, Extern, and I/O interrupts
> instead of global variables.
>
> This allows for more accurate error handling; a CPU waiting for an
> interrupt will not have it "stolen" by a different CPU that was not
> supposed to wait for one, and now two CPUs can wait for interrupts at
> the same time.
>
> Signed-off-by: Claudio Imbrenda <imbrenda@linux.ibm.com>
> ---
> lib/s390x/asm/arch_def.h | 7 ++++++-
> lib/s390x/interrupt.c | 38 ++++++++++++++++----------------------
> 2 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/lib/s390x/asm/arch_def.h b/lib/s390x/asm/arch_def.h
> index 72553819..3a0d9c43 100644
> --- a/lib/s390x/asm/arch_def.h
> +++ b/lib/s390x/asm/arch_def.h
> @@ -124,7 +124,12 @@ struct lowcore {
> uint8_t pad_0x0280[0x0308 - 0x0280]; /* 0x0280 */
> uint64_t sw_int_crs[16]; /* 0x0308 */
> struct psw sw_int_psw; /* 0x0388 */
> - uint8_t pad_0x0310[0x11b0 - 0x0398]; /* 0x0398 */
> + uint32_t pgm_int_expected; /* 0x0398 */
> + uint32_t ext_int_expected; /* 0x039c */
> + void (*pgm_cleanup_func)(void); /* 0x03a0 */
> + void (*ext_cleanup_func)(void); /* 0x03a8 */
> + void (*io_int_func)(void); /* 0x03b0 */
If you switch the function pointers and the *_expected around,
you can use bools for the latter, right?
I think, since they're names suggest that they're bools, they should
be. Additionally I prefer true/false over 1/0, since the latter raises
the questions if other values are also used.
> + uint8_t pad_0x03b8[0x11b0 - 0x03b8]; /* 0x03b8 */
> uint64_t mcck_ext_sa_addr; /* 0x11b0 */
> uint8_t pad_0x11b8[0x1200 - 0x11b8]; /* 0x11b8 */
> uint64_t fprs_sa[16]; /* 0x1200 */
> diff --git a/lib/s390x/interrupt.c b/lib/s390x/interrupt.c
> index 27d3b767..e57946f0 100644
> --- a/lib/s390x/interrupt.c
> +++ b/lib/s390x/interrupt.c
> @@ -15,14 +15,11 @@
> #include <fault.h>
> #include <asm/page.h>
>
> -static bool pgm_int_expected;
> -static bool ext_int_expected;
> -static void (*pgm_cleanup_func)(void);
> static struct lowcore *lc;
>
> void expect_pgm_int(void)
> {
> - pgm_int_expected = true;
> + lc->pgm_int_expected = 1;
> lc->pgm_int_code = 0;
> lc->trans_exc_id = 0;
> mb();
[...]
> void handle_pgm_int(struct stack_frame_int *stack)
> {
> - if (!pgm_int_expected) {
> + if (!lc->pgm_int_expected) {
> /* Force sclp_busy to false, otherwise we will loop forever */
> sclp_handle_ext();
> print_pgm_info(stack);
> }
>
> - pgm_int_expected = false;
> + lc->pgm_int_expected = 0;
>
> - if (pgm_cleanup_func)
> - (*pgm_cleanup_func)();
> + if (lc->pgm_cleanup_func)
> + (*lc->pgm_cleanup_func)();
[...]
> + if (lc->io_int_func)
> + return lc->io_int_func();
Why is a difference between the function pointer usages here?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-06-07 10:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-06-03 15:40 [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v1 0/2] better smp interrupt checks Claudio Imbrenda
2022-06-03 15:40 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v1 1/2] s390x: skey.c: rework the interrupt handler Claudio Imbrenda
2022-06-07 13:29 ` Nico Boehr
2022-06-03 15:40 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v1 2/2] lib: s390x: better smp interrupt checks Claudio Imbrenda
2022-06-07 10:01 ` Janis Schoetterl-Glausch [this message]
2022-06-07 11:08 ` Claudio Imbrenda
2022-06-07 14:23 ` Nico Boehr
2022-06-07 14:41 ` Claudio Imbrenda
2022-06-07 14:48 ` Nico Boehr
2022-06-07 16:43 ` Claudio Imbrenda
2022-06-10 9:43 ` Janosch Frank
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=5552dc4a-4c1f-2f01-eaa7-fa42042d4455@linux.ibm.com \
--to=scgl@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=frankja@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=imbrenda@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nrb@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=pmorel@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