On 2019-12-02 11:41, Thomas Huth wrote:
On 29/11/2019 13.01, David Hildenbrand wrote:
On 28.11.19 13:46, Pierre Morel wrote:
Having a weak function allows the tests programm to declare its own
IRQ handler.
This is helpfull for I/O tests to have the I/O IRQ handler having
its special work to do.
Signed-off-by: Pierre Morel <pmorel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reviewed-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
lib/s390x/interrupt.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/lib/s390x/interrupt.c b/lib/s390x/interrupt.c
index 3e07867..d70fde3 100644
--- a/lib/s390x/interrupt.c
+++ b/lib/s390x/interrupt.c
@@ -140,7 +140,7 @@ void handle_mcck_int(void)
lc->mcck_old_psw.addr);
}
-void handle_io_int(void)
+__attribute__((weak)) void handle_io_int(void)
{
report_abort("Unexpected io interrupt: at %#lx",
lc->io_old_psw.addr);
The clear alternative would be a way to register a callback function.
That way you can modify the callback during the tests. As long as not
registered, wrong I/Os can be caught easily here. @Thomas?
I don't mind too much, but I think I'd also slightly prefer a registered
callback function here instead.
Thomas
As you like but I wonder why you prefer the complicated solution.
The kvm-unit-test is single task, if a test really need something
complicated it can be done in the test not in the common code.
Anyway I do like you want.
--
Pierre Morel
IBM Lab Boeblingen
