On 2019-12-02 15:22, Cornelia Huck wrote:
On Thu, 28 Nov 2019 13:46:04 +0100
Pierre Morel <pmorel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
First step by testing the channel subsystem is to enumerate the css and
s/by/for/
ok
retrieve the css devices.
This test the success of STSCH I/O instruction.
s/test/tests/
yes
Signed-off-by: Pierre Morel <pmorel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
s390x/Makefile | 4 ++-
s390x/css.c | 86 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
s390x/unittests.cfg | 4 +++
3 files changed, 93 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
create mode 100644 s390x/css.c
(...)
diff --git a/s390x/css.c b/s390x/css.c
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..8186f55
--- /dev/null
+++ b/s390x/css.c
@@ -0,0 +1,86 @@
+/*
+ * Channel Sub-System tests
s/Sub-System/Subsystem/
yes too
+ *
+ * Copyright (c) 2019 IBM Corp
+ *
+ * Authors:
+ * Pierre Morel <pmorel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
+ *
+ * This code is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it
+ * under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 2.
+ */
+
+#include <libcflat.h>
+
+#include <css.h>
+
+#define SID_ONE 0x00010000
+
+static struct schib schib;
+
+static const char *Channel_type[3] = {
+ "I/O", "CHSC", "MSG"
No EADM? :)
I forgot EADM, I will add it!
I don't think we plan to emulate anything beyond I/O in QEMU, though.
Even, yes, no plan to use it for now.
+};
+
+static int test_device_sid;
+
+static void test_enumerate(void)
+{
+ struct pmcw *pmcw = &schib.pmcw;
+ int sid;
+ int ret, i;
+ int found = 0;
+
+ for (sid = 0; sid < 0xffff; sid++) {
+ ret = stsch(sid|SID_ONE, &schib);
This seems a bit odd. You are basically putting the subchannel number
into sid, OR in the one, and then use the resulting value as the sid
(subchannel identifier).
+ if (!ret && (pmcw->flags & PMCW_DNV)) {
+ report_info("SID %04x Type %s PIM %x", sid,
That's not a sid, but the subchannel number (see above).
+ Channel_type[pmcw->st], pmcw->pim);
+ for (i = 0; i < 8; i++) {
+ if ((pmcw->pim << i) & 0x80) {
+ report_info("CHPID[%d]: %02x", i,
+ pmcw->chpid[i]);
+ break;
+ }
+ }
+ found++;
+
+ }
Here, you iterate over the 0-0xffff range, even if you got a condition
code 3 (indicating no more subchannels in that set). Is that
intentional?
I thought there could be more subchannels.
I need then a break in the loop when this happens.
I will reread the PoP to see how to find that no more subchannel are in
that set.
+ if (found && !test_device_sid)
+ test_device_sid = sid|SID_ONE;
You set test_device_sid to the last valid subchannel? Why?
The last ? I wanted the first one
I wanted something easy but I should have explain.
To avoid doing complicated things like doing a sense on each valid
subchannel I just take the first one.
Should be enough as we do not go to the device in this test.
+ }
+ if (!found) {
+ report("Found %d devices", 0, found);
+ return;
+ }
+ ret = stsch(test_device_sid, &schib);
Why do you do a stsch() again?
right, no need.
In an internal version I used to print some informations from the SCHIB.
Since in between I overwrote the SHIB, I did it again.
But in this version; no need.
+ if (ret) {
+ report("Err %d on stsch on sid %08x", 0, ret, test_device_sid);
+ return;
+ }
+ report("Tested", 1);
+ return;
I don't think you need this return statement.
right I have enough work. :)
Your test only enumerates devices in the first subchannel set. Do you
plan to enhance the test to enable the MSS facility and iterate over
all subchannel sets?
Yes, it is something we can do in a following series
+}
+
+static struct {
+ const char *name;
+ void (*func)(void);
+} tests[] = {
+ { "enumerate (stsch)", test_enumerate },
+ { NULL, NULL }
+};
+
+int main(int argc, char *argv[])
+{
+ int i;
+
+ report_prefix_push("Channel Sub-System");
s/Sub-System/Subsystem/
yes, again.
Thanks for the review.
Regards,
Pierre
--
Pierre Morel
IBM Lab Boeblingen
