On 8/23/19 4:12 PM, Thomas Huth wrote: > On 8/22/19 1:11 PM, Janosch Frank wrote: >> By adding a load reset routine to cstart.S we can also test the clear >> reset done by subcode 0, as we now can restore our registers again. >> >> Signed-off-by: Janosch Frank <frankja@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> --- >> I managed to extract this from another bigger test, so let's add it to the bunch. >> I'd be very happy about assembly review :-) > > FWIW, the assembly code looks fine to me. > >> --- >> s390x/cstart64.S | 27 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> s390x/diag308.c | 31 ++++++++++--------------------- >> 2 files changed, 37 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/s390x/cstart64.S b/s390x/cstart64.S >> index dedfe80..47045e1 100644 >> --- a/s390x/cstart64.S >> +++ b/s390x/cstart64.S >> @@ -145,6 +145,33 @@ memsetxc: >> .endm >> >> .section .text >> +/* >> + * load_reset calling convention: >> + * %r2 subcode (0 or 1) >> + */ >> +.globl load_reset >> +load_reset: > > Maybe rather name the function diag308_load_reset so that it is clear > that it belongs to the diag308 test? Sure > Or are you going to re-use this function in other tests later? I currently have no such plans But I'm thinking about a way to check the CPU registers in combination with smp. So it might be extended. > > Anyway, > Reviewed-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@xxxxxxxxxx> > Thanks!
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
