| Message ID | 20200110184050.191506-4-imbrenda@linux.ibm.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | s390x: SCLP Unit test | expand |
On 1/10/20 7:40 PM, Claudio Imbrenda wrote: > Add a wrapper for the SET PREFIX and STORE PREFIX instructions, and > use it instead of using inline assembly. > > Signed-off-by: Claudio Imbrenda <imbrenda@linux.ibm.com> > Reviewed-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> Reviewed-by: Janosch Frank <frankja@linux.ibm.com> > @@ -63,14 +60,10 @@ static void test_spx(void) > * some facility bits there ... at least some of them should be > * set in our buffer afterwards. > */ > - asm volatile ( > - " stpx %0\n" > - " spx %1\n" > - " stfl 0\n" > - " spx %0\n" > - : "+Q"(old_prefix) > - : "Q"(new_prefix) > - : "memory"); > + old_prefix = get_prefix(); > + set_prefix(new_prefix); > + asm volatile(" stfl 0" : : : "memory"); Couldn't we also use stfl from facility.h here? And do we need to add a memory clobber to it? > + set_prefix(old_prefix); > report(pagebuf[GEN_LC_STFL] != 0, "stfl to new prefix"); > > expect_pgm_int(); >
On 10.01.20 19:40, Claudio Imbrenda wrote: > Add a wrapper for the SET PREFIX and STORE PREFIX instructions, and > use it instead of using inline assembly. > > Signed-off-by: Claudio Imbrenda <imbrenda@linux.ibm.com> > Reviewed-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> > --- > lib/s390x/asm/arch_def.h | 13 +++++++++++++ > s390x/intercept.c | 23 ++++++++--------------- > 2 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/lib/s390x/asm/arch_def.h b/lib/s390x/asm/arch_def.h > index 1a5e3c6..15a4d49 100644 > --- a/lib/s390x/asm/arch_def.h > +++ b/lib/s390x/asm/arch_def.h > @@ -284,4 +284,17 @@ static inline int servc(uint32_t command, unsigned long sccb) > return cc; > } > > +static inline void set_prefix(uint32_t new_prefix) > +{ > + asm volatile(" spx %0" : : "Q" (new_prefix) : "memory"); > +} > + > +static inline uint32_t get_prefix(void) > +{ > + uint32_t current_prefix; > + > + asm volatile(" stpx %0" : "=Q" (current_prefix)); > + return current_prefix; > +} > + > #endif > diff --git a/s390x/intercept.c b/s390x/intercept.c > index 3696e33..cd96121 100644 > --- a/s390x/intercept.c > +++ b/s390x/intercept.c > @@ -26,13 +26,10 @@ static void test_stpx(void) > uint32_t new_prefix = (uint32_t)(intptr_t)pagebuf; > > /* Can we successfully change the prefix? */ > - asm volatile ( > - " stpx %0\n" > - " spx %2\n" > - " stpx %1\n" > - " spx %0\n" > - : "+Q"(old_prefix), "+Q"(tst_prefix) > - : "Q"(new_prefix)); > + old_prefix = get_prefix(); > + set_prefix(new_prefix); > + tst_prefix = get_prefix(); > + set_prefix(old_prefix); > report(old_prefix == 0 && tst_prefix == new_prefix, "store prefix"); > > expect_pgm_int(); > @@ -63,14 +60,10 @@ static void test_spx(void) > * some facility bits there ... at least some of them should be > * set in our buffer afterwards. > */ > - asm volatile ( > - " stpx %0\n" > - " spx %1\n" > - " stfl 0\n" > - " spx %0\n" > - : "+Q"(old_prefix) > - : "Q"(new_prefix) > - : "memory"); > + old_prefix = get_prefix(); > + set_prefix(new_prefix); > + asm volatile(" stfl 0" : : : "memory"); > + set_prefix(old_prefix); > report(pagebuf[GEN_LC_STFL] != 0, "stfl to new prefix"); > > expect_pgm_int(); > Besides the comments from Janosch, looks good to me.
On Mon, 13 Jan 2020 10:42:01 +0100 Janosch Frank <frankja@linux.ibm.com> wrote: > On 1/10/20 7:40 PM, Claudio Imbrenda wrote: > > Add a wrapper for the SET PREFIX and STORE PREFIX instructions, and > > use it instead of using inline assembly. > > > > Signed-off-by: Claudio Imbrenda <imbrenda@linux.ibm.com> > > Reviewed-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> > > Reviewed-by: Janosch Frank <frankja@linux.ibm.com> > > > @@ -63,14 +60,10 @@ static void test_spx(void) > > * some facility bits there ... at least some of them > > should be > > * set in our buffer afterwards. > > */ > > - asm volatile ( > > - " stpx %0\n" > > - " spx %1\n" > > - " stfl 0\n" > > - " spx %0\n" > > - : "+Q"(old_prefix) > > - : "Q"(new_prefix) > > - : "memory"); > > + old_prefix = get_prefix(); > > + set_prefix(new_prefix); > > + asm volatile(" stfl 0" : : : "memory"); > > Couldn't we also use stfl from facility.h here? > And do we need to add a memory clobber to it? will do both > > + set_prefix(old_prefix); > > report(pagebuf[GEN_LC_STFL] != 0, "stfl to new prefix"); > > > > expect_pgm_int(); > > > >
diff --git a/lib/s390x/asm/arch_def.h b/lib/s390x/asm/arch_def.h index 1a5e3c6..15a4d49 100644 --- a/lib/s390x/asm/arch_def.h +++ b/lib/s390x/asm/arch_def.h @@ -284,4 +284,17 @@ static inline int servc(uint32_t command, unsigned long sccb) return cc; } +static inline void set_prefix(uint32_t new_prefix) +{ + asm volatile(" spx %0" : : "Q" (new_prefix) : "memory"); +} + +static inline uint32_t get_prefix(void) +{ + uint32_t current_prefix; + + asm volatile(" stpx %0" : "=Q" (current_prefix)); + return current_prefix; +} + #endif diff --git a/s390x/intercept.c b/s390x/intercept.c index 3696e33..cd96121 100644 --- a/s390x/intercept.c +++ b/s390x/intercept.c @@ -26,13 +26,10 @@ static void test_stpx(void) uint32_t new_prefix = (uint32_t)(intptr_t)pagebuf; /* Can we successfully change the prefix? */ - asm volatile ( - " stpx %0\n" - " spx %2\n" - " stpx %1\n" - " spx %0\n" - : "+Q"(old_prefix), "+Q"(tst_prefix) - : "Q"(new_prefix)); + old_prefix = get_prefix(); + set_prefix(new_prefix); + tst_prefix = get_prefix(); + set_prefix(old_prefix); report(old_prefix == 0 && tst_prefix == new_prefix, "store prefix"); expect_pgm_int(); @@ -63,14 +60,10 @@ static void test_spx(void) * some facility bits there ... at least some of them should be * set in our buffer afterwards. */ - asm volatile ( - " stpx %0\n" - " spx %1\n" - " stfl 0\n" - " spx %0\n" - : "+Q"(old_prefix) - : "Q"(new_prefix) - : "memory"); + old_prefix = get_prefix(); + set_prefix(new_prefix); + asm volatile(" stfl 0" : : : "memory"); + set_prefix(old_prefix); report(pagebuf[GEN_LC_STFL] != 0, "stfl to new prefix"); expect_pgm_int();