Re: [PATCH 1/9] target/s390x: Factor diag_iplb_write() out

[Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com>]

On 02/10/2025 11.11, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:

Can you please provide some reasoning in the patch description?
The code is only used in one place, so I fail to see the reason at the first 
glance.

  Thanks,
   Thomas


> Signed-off-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <philmd@linaro.org>
> ---
>   target/s390x/diag.c | 17 ++++++++++++-----
>   1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/target/s390x/diag.c b/target/s390x/diag.c
> index da44b0133ed..ed320fc0c1f 100644
> --- a/target/s390x/diag.c
> +++ b/target/s390x/diag.c
> @@ -73,6 +73,17 @@ static int diag308_parm_check(CPUS390XState *env, uint64_t r1, uint64_t addr,
>       return 0;
>   }
>   
> +static void diag_iplb_write(IplParameterBlock *iplb, S390CPU *cpu, uint64_t addr)
> +{
> +    const size_t iplb_len = be32_to_cpu(iplb->len);
> +
> +    if (s390_is_pv()) {
> +        s390_cpu_pv_mem_write(cpu, 0, iplb, iplb_len);
> +    } else {
> +        cpu_physical_memory_write(addr, iplb, iplb_len);
> +    }
> +}
> +
>   void handle_diag_308(CPUS390XState *env, uint64_t r1, uint64_t r3, uintptr_t ra)
>   {
>       bool valid;
> @@ -164,11 +175,7 @@ out:
>               return;
>           }
>   
> -        if (!s390_is_pv()) {
> -            cpu_physical_memory_write(addr, iplb, be32_to_cpu(iplb->len));
> -        } else {
> -            s390_cpu_pv_mem_write(cpu, 0, iplb, be32_to_cpu(iplb->len));
> -        }
> +        diag_iplb_write(iplb, cpu, addr);
>           env->regs[r1 + 1] = DIAG_308_RC_OK;
>           return;
>       case DIAG308_PV_START: