On 2020-07-03 14:01, Janosch Frank wrote:
On 7/3/20 11:05 AM, Pierre Morel wrote:
On 2020-07-03 10:41, Thomas Huth wrote:
On 02/07/2020 18.31, Pierre Morel wrote:
After a channel is enabled we start a SENSE_ID command using
the SSCH instruction to recognize the control unit and device.
This tests the success of SSCH, the I/O interruption and the TSCH
instructions.
The SENSE_ID command response is tested to report 0xff inside
its reserved field and to report the same control unit type
as the cu_type kernel argument.
Without the cu_type kernel argument, the test expects a device
with a default control unit type of 0x3832, a.k.a virtio-net-ccw.
Signed-off-by: Pierre Morel <pmorel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
[...]
diff --git a/lib/s390x/css.h b/lib/s390x/css.h
index 0ddceb1..9c22644 100644
--- a/lib/s390x/css.h
+++ b/lib/s390x/css.h
@@ -11,6 +11,8 @@
#ifndef CSS_H
#define CSS_H
+#define lowcore_ptr ((struct lowcore *)0x0)
I'd prefer if you could either put this into the css_lib.c file or in
lib/s390x/asm/arch_def.h.
I have a patch ready for this :)
But I did not want to add too much new things in this series that could
start a new discussion.
I have 2 versions of the patch:
- The simple one with just the declaration in arch_def.h
- The complete one with update of all tests (but smp) using a pointer to
lowcore.
I've seen that patch on your branch and like most maintainers I'm not
incredibly happy with patches touching a single line in a lot of files.
Maybe we can achieve a compromise and only clean up our library. The
tests can be changed when they need to be touched for other changes.
Anyway for now I think css_lib.c might be the right place. We can talk
about a lowcore cleanup next week if you want.
css_lib.c is not a good solution because the pointer is also needed in
css.c.
So the question is css.h or arch_def.h
I have set it in css.h because Ithink it is better to keep it local
until the others tests need/want to use the same way of accessing lowcore.
--
Pierre Morel
IBM Lab Boeblingen
