On 17/12/2020 16.31, Janosch Frank wrote:
> On 12/17/20 3:31 PM, Janosch Frank wrote:
>> On 12/17/20 11:34 AM, Thomas Huth wrote:
>>> On 17/12/2020 10.59, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 17.12.20 10:53, Thomas Huth wrote:
>>>>> On 11/12/2020 11.00, Janosch Frank wrote:
>>>>>> Not much to test except for the privilege and specification
>>>>>> exceptions.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Janosch Frank <frankja@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>>> Reviewed-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>> lib/s390x/sclp.c | 2 ++
>>>>>> lib/s390x/sclp.h | 6 +++++-
>>>>>> s390x/intercept.c | 19 +++++++++++++++++++
>>>>>> 3 files changed, 26 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git a/lib/s390x/sclp.c b/lib/s390x/sclp.c
>>>>>> index cf6ea7c..0001993 100644
>>>>>> --- a/lib/s390x/sclp.c
>>>>>> +++ b/lib/s390x/sclp.c
>>>>>> @@ -138,6 +138,8 @@ void sclp_facilities_setup(void)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> assert(read_info);
>>>>>>
>>>>>> + sclp_facilities.has_diag318 = read_info->byte_134_diag318;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> cpu = (void *)read_info + read_info->offset_cpu;
>>>>>> for (i = 0; i < read_info->entries_cpu; i++, cpu++) {
>>>>>> if (cpu->address == cpu0_addr) {
>>>>>> diff --git a/lib/s390x/sclp.h b/lib/s390x/sclp.h
>>>>>> index 6c86037..58f8e54 100644
>>>>>> --- a/lib/s390x/sclp.h
>>>>>> +++ b/lib/s390x/sclp.h
>>>>>> @@ -105,7 +105,8 @@ extern struct sclp_facilities sclp_facilities;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> struct sclp_facilities {
>>>>>> uint64_t has_sief2 : 1;
>>>>>> - uint64_t : 63;
>>>>>> + uint64_t has_diag318 : 1;
>>>>>> + uint64_t : 62;
>>>>>> };
>>>>>>
>>>>>> typedef struct ReadInfo {
>>>>>> @@ -130,6 +131,9 @@ typedef struct ReadInfo {
>>>>>> uint16_t highest_cpu;
>>>>>> uint8_t _reserved5[124 - 122]; /* 122-123 */
>>>>>> uint32_t hmfai;
>>>>>> + uint8_t reserved7[134 - 128];
>>>>>> + uint8_t byte_134_diag318 : 1;
>>>>>> + uint8_t : 7;
>>>>>> struct CPUEntry entries[0];
>>>>>
>>>>> ... the entries[] array can be moved around here without any further ado?
>>>>> Looks confusing to me. Should there be a CPUEntry array here at all, or only
>>>>> in ReadCpuInfo?
>>>>
>>>> there is offset_cpu for the cpu entries at the beginning of the structure.
>>>
>>> Ah, thanks, right, this was used earlier in the patch series, now I
>>> remember. But I think the "struct CPUEntry entries[0]" here is rather
>>> confusing, since there is no guarantee that the entries are really at this
>>> location ... I think this line should rather be replaced by a comment saying
>>> that offset_cpu should be used instead.
>>
>> Sure, as long as it's clear that there's something at the end, I'm fine
>> with it.
>
> I would add that to the "fix style issues" patch or into an own patch.
> Any preferences?
I think a separate patch is cleaner.
> - struct CPUEntry entries[0];
> + /*
> + * The cpu entries follow, they start at the offset specified
> + * in offset_cpu.
> + */
Sounds good, thanks!
Thomas
