On 20.01.20 12:27, Cornelia Huck wrote: > On Fri, 17 Jan 2020 05:46:37 -0500 > Janosch Frank <frankja@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> Up to now a secondary cpu could have returned from the function it was >> executing and ending up somewhere in cstart64.S. This was mostly >> circumvented by an endless loop in the function that it executed. >> >> Let's add a loop to the end of the cpu setup, so we don't have to rely >> on added loops in the tests. >> >> Signed-off-by: Janosch Frank <frankja@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> --- >> s390x/cstart64.S | 2 ++ >> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/s390x/cstart64.S b/s390x/cstart64.S >> index 9af6bb3..5fd8d2f 100644 >> --- a/s390x/cstart64.S >> +++ b/s390x/cstart64.S >> @@ -162,6 +162,8 @@ smp_cpu_setup_state: >> /* We should only go once through cpu setup and not for every restart */ >> stg %r14, GEN_LC_RESTART_NEW_PSW + 8 >> br %r14 >> + /* If the function returns, just loop here */ >> +0: j 0 > > Would it make sense to e.g. load a disabled wait psw instead? Or does > that mess things up elsewhere? I think we can keep it like that for now (simpler than loading a PSW). Overall, I don't care about burning CPU cycles here :) -- Thanks, David / dhildenb
