Re: [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v8 1/2] s390x: topology: Check the Perform Topology Function

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Quoting Pierre Morel (2023-04-26 10:34:25)
[...]
> diff --git a/s390x/topology.c b/s390x/topology.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..07f1650
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/s390x/topology.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,191 @@
[...]
> +#define PTF_INVALID_FUNCTION   0xff

No longer used?

[...]
> +static void check_specifications(void)
> +{
> +       unsigned long wrong_bits = 0;
> +       unsigned long ptf_bits;
> +       unsigned long rc;
> +       int i;
> +
> +       report_prefix_push("Specifications");
> +
> +       /* Function codes above 3 are undefined */
> +       for (i = 4; i < 255; i++) {
> +               expect_pgm_int();
> +               ptf(i, &rc);
> +               mb();
> +               if (lowcore.pgm_int_code != PGM_INT_CODE_SPECIFICATION) {

Please use clear_pgm_int(), the return value will be the interruption code. You can also get rid of the barrier then.

Also, using wrong_bits is confusing here since it serves a completely different purpose below.

Maybe just:

if (clear_pgm_int() != PGM_INT_CODE_SPECIFICATION)
    report_fail("FC %d did not yield specification exception", i);

[...]
> +       /* Reserved bits must be 0 */
> +       for (i = 8, wrong_bits = 0; i < 64; i++) {
> +               ptf_bits = 0x01UL << i;
> +               expect_pgm_int();
> +               ptf(ptf_bits, &rc);
> +               mb();
> +               if (lowcore.pgm_int_code != PGM_INT_CODE_SPECIFICATION)

Also use clear_pgm_int() here.




[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Development]     [Kernel Newbies]     [IDE]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite Info]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux ATA RAID]     [Samba]     [Linux Media]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux