On Mon, 13 Jan 2020 12:00:00 +0100
David Hildenbrand <david@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > +/**
> > + * Test some bits in the instruction format that are specified to
> > be ignored.
> > + */
> > +static void test_instbits(void)
> > +{
> > + SCCBHeader *h = (SCCBHeader *)pagebuf;
> > + int cc;
> > +
> > + expect_pgm_int();
> > + sclp_mark_busy();
> > + h->length = 8;
> > + sclp_setup_int();
> > +
> > + asm volatile(
> > + " .insn rre,0xb2204200,%1,%2\n" /* servc
> > %1,%2 */
> > + " ipm %0\n"
> > + " srl %0,28"
> > + : "=&d" (cc) : "d" (valid_code), "a"
> > (__pa(pagebuf))
> > + : "cc", "memory");
> > + if (lc->pgm_int_code) {
> > + sclp_handle_ext();
> > + cc = 1;
> > + } else if (!cc)
> > +
>
> I wonder if something like the following would be possible:
>
> expect_pgm_int();
> ...
> asm volatiole();
> ...
> sclp_wait_busy();
> check_pgm_int_code(PGM_INT_CODE_SPECIFICATION);
we do not expect a specification exception, if that happens it's
a bug and the test should rightfully fail.
> We would have to clear "sclp_busy" when we get a progam interrupt on a
> servc instruction - shouldn't be too hard to add to the program
> exception handler.
Sure that could be done, but is it worth it to rework the program
interrupt handler only for one unit test?
[...]
> > + valid_code = 0;
>
> This can be dropped because ...
>
> > + report_abort("READ_SCP_INFO failed");
>
> ... you abort here.
will fix
