On 5/30/23 17:35, Claudio Imbrenda wrote:
On Tue, 30 May 2023 14:52:43 +0200
Pierre Morel <pmorel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
If SCLP_CMDW_READ_SCP_INFO fails due to a short buffer, retry
with a greater buffer.
the idea is good, but I wonder if the code can be simplified (see below)
Signed-off-by: Pierre Morel <pmorel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
lib/s390x/sclp.c | 58 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------
1 file changed, 50 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
diff --git a/lib/s390x/sclp.c b/lib/s390x/sclp.c
index 34a31da..9d51ca4 100644
--- a/lib/s390x/sclp.c
+++ b/lib/s390x/sclp.c
@@ -17,13 +17,14 @@
#include "sclp.h"
#include <alloc_phys.h>
#include <alloc_page.h>
+#include <asm/facility.h>
extern unsigned long stacktop;
static uint64_t storage_increment_size;
static uint64_t max_ram_size;
static uint64_t ram_size;
-char _read_info[PAGE_SIZE] __attribute__((__aligned__(PAGE_SIZE)));
+char _read_info[2 * PAGE_SIZE] __attribute__((__aligned__(PAGE_SIZE)));
this is ok ^
[skip everything else]
void sclp_read_info(void)
{
- sclp_read_scp_info((void *)_read_info, SCCB_SIZE);
sclp_read_scp_info((void *)_read_info,
test_facility(140) ? sizeof(_read_info) : SCCB_SIZE;
+ sclp_read_scp_info((void *)_read_info);
read_info = (ReadInfo *)_read_info;
}
You are right, no need to begin with a short buffer if we can go with a
big one at first try.
I take it
thx
