On 11.12.19 13:34, Janosch Frank wrote: > On 12/11/19 1:31 PM, David Hildenbrand wrote: >> On 11.12.19 12:59, Janosch Frank wrote: >>> Up to now we ignored the psw mask and only used the psw address when >>> bringing up a new cpu. For DAT we need to also load the mask, so let's >>> do that. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Janosch Frank <frankja@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>> --- >>> lib/s390x/smp.c | 2 ++ >>> s390x/cstart64.S | 2 +- >>> 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/lib/s390x/smp.c b/lib/s390x/smp.c >>> index f57f420..e17751a 100644 >>> --- a/lib/s390x/smp.c >>> +++ b/lib/s390x/smp.c >>> @@ -185,6 +185,8 @@ int smp_cpu_setup(uint16_t addr, struct psw psw) >>> cpu->stack = (uint64_t *)alloc_pages(2); >>> >>> /* Start without DAT and any other mask bits. */ >>> + cpu->lowcore->sw_int_psw.mask = psw.mask; >>> + cpu->lowcore->sw_int_psw.addr = psw.addr; >>> cpu->lowcore->sw_int_grs[14] = psw.addr; >> >> Not looking at the code (sorry :D ), do we still need this then? (you >> drop the br bewlo) > > r14 is the return address, saving/initialising it doesn't sound like a > bad idea to me. If we ever have stack traces, it might show up, or won't it? > >> >>> cpu->lowcore->sw_int_grs[15] = (uint64_t)cpu->stack + (PAGE_SIZE * 4); >>> lc->restart_new_psw.mask = 0x0000000180000000UL; >>> diff --git a/s390x/cstart64.S b/s390x/cstart64.S >>> index 86dd4c4..e6a6bdb 100644 >>> --- a/s390x/cstart64.S >>> +++ b/s390x/cstart64.S >>> @@ -159,7 +159,7 @@ smp_cpu_setup_state: >>> xgr %r1, %r1 >>> lmg %r0, %r15, GEN_LC_SW_INT_GRS >>> lctlg %c0, %c0, GEN_LC_SW_INT_CRS >>> - br %r14 >>> + lpswe GEN_LC_SW_INT_PSW >>> Makes sense Reviewed-by: David Hildenbrand <david@xxxxxxxxxx> -- Thanks, David / dhildenb
