On 21.01.20 14:42, Janosch Frank wrote:
> Up to now a secondary cpu could have returned from the function it was
> executing and ending up somewhere in cstart64.S. This was mostly
> circumvented by an endless loop in the function that it executed.
>
> Let's add a loop to the end of the cpu setup, so we don't have to rely
> on added loops in the tests.
>
> Signed-off-by: Janosch Frank <frankja@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> s390x/cstart64.S | 2 ++
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/s390x/cstart64.S b/s390x/cstart64.S
> index 9af6bb3..5fd8d2f 100644
> --- a/s390x/cstart64.S
> +++ b/s390x/cstart64.S
> @@ -162,6 +162,8 @@ smp_cpu_setup_state:
> /* We should only go once through cpu setup and not for every restart */
> stg %r14, GEN_LC_RESTART_NEW_PSW + 8
> br %r14
> + /* If the function returns, just loop here */
> +0: j 0
>
> pgm_int:
> SAVE_REGS
>
This patch collides with a patch I have still queued
Author: Janosch Frank <frankja@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed Dec 11 06:59:22 2019 -0500
s390x: smp: Use full PSW to bringup new cpu
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>
Reviewed-by: David Hildenbrand <david@xxxxxxxxxx>
Message-Id: <20191211115923.9191-2-frankja@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: David Hildenbrand <david@xxxxxxxxxx>
In that patch we use a lpswe to jump to the target code, not a br. So the
return address will no longer be stored in %14 and this code here would stop working
AFAIKS.
Shall I drop that patch for now?
--
Thanks,
David / dhildenb
