Re: [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v2 3/7] s390x: Add cpu id to interrupt error prints

David Hildenbrand
2020-01-16T13:19:09Z

On 16.01.20 14:04, Janosch Frank wrote:
> On 1/16/20 1:17 PM, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>> On 16.01.20 13:05, Janosch Frank wrote:
>>> It's good to know which cpu broke the test.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Janosch Frank <frankja@linux.ibm.com>
>>> ---
>>> lib/s390x/interrupt.c | 20 ++++++++++----------
>>> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/lib/s390x/interrupt.c b/lib/s390x/interrupt.c
>>> index 05f30be..773752a 100644
>>> --- a/lib/s390x/interrupt.c
>>> +++ b/lib/s390x/interrupt.c
>>> @@ -107,8 +107,8 @@ static void fixup_pgm_int(void)
>>> void handle_pgm_int(void)
>>> {
>>> if (!pgm_int_expected)
>>> - report_abort("Unexpected program interrupt: %d at %#lx, ilen %d\n",
>>> - lc->pgm_int_code, lc->pgm_old_psw.addr,
>>> + report_abort("Unexpected program interrupt: %d on cpu %d at %#lx, ilen %d\n",
>>> + lc->pgm_int_code, stap(), lc->pgm_old_psw.addr,
>>> lc->pgm_int_id);
>>
>> nit: "cpu: %d"
>>
>>>
>>> pgm_int_expected = false;
>>> @@ -119,8 +119,8 @@ void handle_ext_int(void)
>>> {
>>> if (!ext_int_expected &&
>>> lc->ext_int_code != EXT_IRQ_SERVICE_SIG) {
>>> - report_abort("Unexpected external call interrupt (code %#x): at %#lx",
>>> - lc->ext_int_code, lc->ext_old_psw.addr);
>>> + report_abort("Unexpected external call interrupt (code %#x): on cpu %d at %#lx",
>>> + stap(), lc->ext_int_code, lc->ext_old_psw.addr);
>>
>> nit: "(code %#x) on cpu: %d" ...
>
> So, should I move the old : or add a second one?

No strong feelings, whatever you prefer. (you can also keep it
unchanged, it's just a test error output after all)

--
Thanks,

David / dhildenb