On 6/21/21 2:32 PM, Thomas Huth wrote: > On 21/06/2021 14.19, Janosch Frank wrote: >> On 6/21/21 12:10 PM, Thomas Huth wrote: >>> On 20/05/2021 11.47, Janosch Frank wrote: >>>> Snippets can be used to easily write and run guest (SIE) tests. >>>> The snippet is linked into the test binaries and can therefore be >>>> accessed via a ptr. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Janosch Frank <frankja@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>>> --- >>>> .gitignore | 2 ++ >>>> s390x/Makefile | 28 ++++++++++++++++++--- >>>> s390x/snippets/c/cstart.S | 13 ++++++++++ >>>> s390x/snippets/c/flat.lds | 51 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>>> 4 files changed, 91 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >>>> create mode 100644 s390x/snippets/c/cstart.S >>>> create mode 100644 s390x/snippets/c/flat.lds >>>> >>>> diff --git a/.gitignore b/.gitignore >>>> index 784cb2dd..29d3635b 100644 >>>> --- a/.gitignore >>>> +++ b/.gitignore >>>> @@ -22,3 +22,5 @@ cscope.* >>>> /api/dirty-log >>>> /api/dirty-log-perf >>>> /s390x/*.bin >>>> +/s390x/snippets/*/*.bin >>>> +/s390x/snippets/*/*.gbin >>>> diff --git a/s390x/Makefile b/s390x/Makefile >>>> index 8de926ab..fe267011 100644 >>>> --- a/s390x/Makefile >>>> +++ b/s390x/Makefile >>>> @@ -75,11 +75,33 @@ OBJDIRS += lib/s390x >>>> asmlib = $(TEST_DIR)/cstart64.o $(TEST_DIR)/cpu.o >>>> >>>> FLATLIBS = $(libcflat) >>>> -%.elf: %.o $(FLATLIBS) $(SRCDIR)/s390x/flat.lds $(asmlib) >>>> + >>>> +SNIPPET_DIR = $(TEST_DIR)/snippets >>>> + >>>> +# C snippets that need to be linked >>>> +snippets-c = >>>> + >>>> +# ASM snippets that are directly compiled and converted to a *.gbin >>>> +snippets-a = >>> >>> Could you please call this snippets-s instead of ...-a ? The -a suffix looks >>> like an archive to me otherwise. >> >> Sure >> >>> >>>> +snippets = $(snippets-a)$(snippets-c) >>> >>> Shouldn't there be a space between the two? >> >> Yes, already fixed that a long while ago >> I thought I had sent out a new version already, maybe that was an >> illusion as I can't seem to find it right now. >> >>> >>>> +snippets-o += $(patsubst %.gbin,%.o,$(snippets)) >>>> + >>>> +$(snippets-a): $(snippets-o) $(FLATLIBS) >>>> + $(OBJCOPY) -O binary $(patsubst %.gbin,%.o,$@) $@ >>>> + $(OBJCOPY) -I binary -O elf64-s390 -B "s390:64-bit" $@ $@ >>>> + >>>> +$(snippets-c): $(snippets-o) $(SNIPPET_DIR)/c/cstart.o $(FLATLIBS) >>>> + $(CC) $(LDFLAGS) -o $@ -T $(SNIPPET_DIR)/c/flat.lds \ >>>> + $(filter %.o, $^) $(FLATLIBS) >>>> + $(OBJCOPY) -O binary $@ $@ >>>> + $(OBJCOPY) -I binary -O elf64-s390 -B "s390:64-bit" $@ $@ >>>> + >>>> +%.elf: $(snippets) %.o $(FLATLIBS) $(SRCDIR)/s390x/flat.lds $(asmlib) >>>> $(CC) $(CFLAGS) -c -o $(@:.elf=.aux.o) \ >>>> $(SRCDIR)/lib/auxinfo.c -DPROGNAME=\"$@\" >>>> $(CC) $(LDFLAGS) -o $@ -T $(SRCDIR)/s390x/flat.lds \ >>>> - $(filter %.o, $^) $(FLATLIBS) $(@:.elf=.aux.o) >>>> + $(filter %.o, $^) $(FLATLIBS) $(snippets) $(@:.elf=.aux.o) >>> >>> Does this link the snippets into all elf files? ... wouldn't it be better to >>> restrict it somehow to the files that really need them? >> >> Yes it does. >> I'd like to avoid having to specify a makefile rule for every test that >> uses snippets as we already have more than the mvpg one in the queue. >> >> So I'm having Steffen looking into a solution for this problem. My first >> idea was to bring the used snippets into the unittests.cfg but I >> disliked that we then would have compile instructions in another file. >> Maybe there's a way to include that into the makefile in a clever way? > > I haven't tried, but maybe you could replace the $(snippets) in the last > line with > > $(wildcard snippets/$@.gbin) > > or something similar? That starts falling apart when multiple tests use the same snippet, no? > > Thomas >
