On 29.05.2017 17:53, Thomas Huth wrote:
> On 29.05.2017 13:06, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>> Add the s390x psw and lowcore structs and generate asm offsets for lowcore
>> fields. Add all lowcore fields defined in the current PoP (z13).
>>
>> Signed-off-by: David Hildenbrand <david@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
> [...]
>> diff --git a/lib/s390x/asm/arch_def.h b/lib/s390x/asm/arch_def.h
>> new file mode 100644
>> index 0000000..25c9516
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/lib/s390x/asm/arch_def.h
>> @@ -0,0 +1,85 @@
>> +/*
>> + * Copyright (c) 2017 Red Hat Inc
>> + *
>> + * Authors:
>> + * David Hildenbrand <david@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> + *
>> + * This code is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it
>> + * under the terms of the GNU Library General Public License version 2.
>> + */
>> +#ifndef _ASM_S390X_ARCH_DEF_H_
>> +#define _ASM_S390X_ARCH_DEF_H_
>> +
>> +struct psw {
>> + uint64_t mask;
>> + uint64_t addr;
>> +} __attribute__ ((__packed__));
>
> The struct is naturally aligned - I think you don't need the packed
> attribute here.
Okay, will drop it.
>
>> +struct lowcore {
>> + uint8_t pad_0x0000[0x0080 - 0x0000]; /* 0x0000 */
>> + uint32_t ext_int_param; /* 0x0080 */
>> + uint16_t cpu_addr; /* 0x0084 */
>> + uint16_t ext_int_code; /* 0x0086 */
>> + uint16_t svc_int_id; /* 0x0088 */
>> + uint16_t svc_int_code; /* 0x008a */
>> + uint16_t pgm_int_id; /* 0x008c */
>> + uint16_t pgm_int_code; /* 0x008e */
>> + uint32_t dxc_vxc; /* 0x0090 */
>> + uint16_t mon_class_nb; /* 0x0094 */
>> + uint8_t per_code; /* 0x0096 */
>> + uint8_t per_atmid; /* 0x0097 */
>> + uint64_t per_addr; /* 0x0098 */
>> + uint8_t exc_acc_id; /* 0x00a0 */
>> + uint8_t per_acc_id; /* 0x00a1 */
>> + uint8_t op_acc_id; /* 0x00a2 */
>> + uint8_t arch_mode_id; /* 0x00a3 */
>> + uint8_t pad_0x00a4[0x00a8 - 0x00a4]; /* 0x00a4 */
>> + uint64_t trans_exc_id; /* 0x00a8 */
>> + uint64_t mon_code; /* 0x00b0 */
>> + uint32_t subsys_id_word; /* 0x00b8 */
>> + uint32_t io_int_param; /* 0x00bc */
>> + uint32_t io_int_word; /* 0x00c0 */
>> + uint8_t pad_0x00c4[0x00c8 - 0x00c4]; /* 0x00c4 */
>> + uint32_t stfl; /* 0x00c8 */
>> + uint8_t pad_0x00cc[0x00e8 - 0x00cc]; /* 0x00cc */
>> + uint64_t mcck_int_code; /* 0x00e8 */
>> + uint8_t pad_0x00f0[0x00f4 - 0x00f0]; /* 0x00f0 */
>> + uint32_t ext_damage_code; /* 0x00f4 */
>> + uint64_t failing_storage_addr; /* 0x00f8 */
>> + uint64_t emon_ca_origin; /* 0x0100 */
>> + uint32_t emon_ca_size; /* 0x0108 */
>> + uint32_t emon_exc_count; /* 0x010c */
>> + uint64_t breaking_event_addr; /* 0x0110 */
>> + uint8_t pad_0x0118[0x0120 - 0x0118]; /* 0x0118 */
>> + struct psw restart_old_psw; /* 0x0120 */
>> + struct psw ext_old_psw; /* 0x0130 */
>> + struct psw svc_old_psw; /* 0x0140 */
>> + struct psw pgm_old_psw; /* 0x0150 */
>> + struct psw mcck_old_psw; /* 0x0160 */
>> + struct psw io_old_psw; /* 0x0170 */
>> + uint8_t pad_0x0180[0x01a0 - 0x0180]; /* 0x0180 */
>> + struct psw restart_new_psw; /* 0x01a0 */
>> + struct psw ext_new_psw; /* 0x01b0 */
>> + struct psw svc_new_psw; /* 0x01c0 */
>> + struct psw pgm_new_psw; /* 0x01d0 */
>> + struct psw mcck_new_psw; /* 0x01e0 */
>> + struct psw io_new_psw; /* 0x01f0 */
>> + uint8_t pad_0x0200[0x1200 - 0x0200]; /* 0x0200 */
>
> In my version of the PoP, there is one more additional field at 0x11b0
> ("Machine-Check-Extended-Save-Area Address") ... maybe add that, too?
>
Thanks, missed that as it does not appear in the table below that
section. Will add it.
>> + uint64_t fprs_sa[16]; /* 0x1200 */
>> + uint64_t grs_sa[16]; /* 0x1280 */
>> + struct psw psw_sa; /* 0x1300 */
>> + uint8_t pad_0x1310[0x1318 - 0x1310]; /* 0x1310 */
>> + uint32_t prefix_sa; /* 0x1318 */
>> + uint32_t fpc_sa; /* 0x131c */
>> + uint8_t pad_0x1320[0x1324 - 0x1320]; /* 0x1320 */
>> + uint32_t tod_pr_sa; /* 0x1324 */
>> + uint64_t cputm_sa; /* 0x1328 */
>> + uint64_t cc_sa; /* 0x1330 */
>> + uint8_t pad_0x1338[0x1340 - 0x1338]; /* 0x1338 */
>> + uint32_t ars_sa[16]; /* 0x1340 */
>> + uint64_t crs_sa[16]; /* 0x1380 */
>> + uint8_t pad_0x1400[0x1800 - 0x1400]; /* 0x1400 */
>> + uint8_t pgm_int_tdb[0x1900 - 0x1800]; /* 0x1800 */
>> +} __attribute__ ((__packed__));
>> +
>> +#endif
>
> Patch looks fine to me. With or without fixing the nits above:
>
> Reviewed-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
Thanks!
--
Thanks,
David
