Re: [kvm-unit-tests PATCH] lib: arm: Use correct halt() prototype from smp.h

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Mon, Apr 08, 2019 at 04:11:25PM +0100, Alexandru Elisei wrote:
> The prototype for the halt() function is incorrect, because halt() doesn't
> take any arguments. Fix it by using the prototype from smp.h.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Alexandru Elisei <alexandru.elisei@xxxxxxx>
> ---
>  lib/arm/io.c | 5 ++---
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/lib/arm/io.c b/lib/arm/io.c
> index 8226b765bdc5..6d3d7afed002 100644
> --- a/lib/arm/io.c
> +++ b/lib/arm/io.c
> @@ -15,11 +15,10 @@
>  #include <asm/psci.h>
>  #include <asm/spinlock.h>
>  #include <asm/io.h>
> +#include <asm/smp.h>
>  
>  #include "io.h"
>  
> -extern void halt(int code);
> -
>  static struct spinlock uart_lock;
>  /*
>   * Use this guess for the uart base in order to make an attempt at
> @@ -93,6 +92,6 @@ void exit(int code)
>  {
>  	chr_testdev_exit(code);
>  	psci_system_off();
> -	halt(code);
> +	halt();
>  	__builtin_unreachable();
>  }
> -- 
> 2.17.0
>

I don't mind this change, because per the code it is the "correct"
thing to do. However, I was being a bit tricky here when I wrote it.
By changing the prototype to take 'code' as argument we guarantee
that 'code' will be in x0/r0 when we halt, giving us a last chance
to see it when inspecting the halted unit test state.

Anyway, like I said, I'm fine with the cleanup, but the prototype
abuse does serve a purpose - maybe just not a good enough purpose
to justify the weirdness.

Thanks,
drew



[Index of Archives]     [KVM ARM]     [KVM ia64]     [KVM ppc]     [Virtualization Tools]     [Spice Development]     [Libvirt]     [Libvirt Users]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Questions]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]

  Powered by Linux