| Message ID | 20190417152842.71730-6-borntraeger@de.ibm.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | KVM: s390: new guest facilities | expand |
On 17.04.19 17:28, Christian Borntraeger wrote: > Some of the new features have a 32byte response for the query function. > Provide a new wrapper similar to __cpacf_query. We might want to factor > this out if other users come up, as of today there is none. So let us > keep the function within KVM. > > Signed-off-by: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com> > Reviewed-by: Collin Walling <walling@linux.ibm.com> > --- > arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c | 13 +++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c > index ff2444d935fd..f0404960a715 100644 > --- a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c > +++ b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c > @@ -321,6 +321,19 @@ static inline int plo_test_bit(unsigned char nr) > return cc == 0; > } > > +static inline void __insn32_query(unsigned int opcode, u8 query[32]) > +{ > + register unsigned long r0 asm("0") = 0; /* query function */ > + register unsigned long r1 asm("1") = (unsigned long) query; > + > + asm volatile( > + /* Parameter regs are ignored */ > + " .insn rrf,%[opc] << 16,2,4,6,0\n" > + : "=m" (*query) > + : "d" (r0), "a" (r1), [opc] "i" (opcode) > + : "cc"); > +} > + > static void kvm_s390_cpu_feat_init(void) > { > int i; > Are these !cpacf functions, so the generic name "__insn32" is preferred over e.g. __cpacf_query32 ? Looks sane to me.
On 17.04.19 17:42, David Hildenbrand wrote: > On 17.04.19 17:28, Christian Borntraeger wrote: >> Some of the new features have a 32byte response for the query function. >> Provide a new wrapper similar to __cpacf_query. We might want to factor >> this out if other users come up, as of today there is none. So let us >> keep the function within KVM. >> >> Signed-off-by: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com> >> Reviewed-by: Collin Walling <walling@linux.ibm.com> >> --- >> arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c | 13 +++++++++++++ >> 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c >> index ff2444d935fd..f0404960a715 100644 >> --- a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c >> +++ b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c >> @@ -321,6 +321,19 @@ static inline int plo_test_bit(unsigned char nr) >> return cc == 0; >> } >> >> +static inline void __insn32_query(unsigned int opcode, u8 query[32]) >> +{ >> + register unsigned long r0 asm("0") = 0; /* query function */ >> + register unsigned long r1 asm("1") = (unsigned long) query; >> + >> + asm volatile( >> + /* Parameter regs are ignored */ >> + " .insn rrf,%[opc] << 16,2,4,6,0\n" >> + : "=m" (*query) >> + : "d" (r0), "a" (r1), [opc] "i" (opcode) >> + : "cc"); >> +} >> + >> static void kvm_s390_cpu_feat_init(void) >> { >> int i; >> > > Are these !cpacf functions, so the generic name "__insn32" is preferred > over e.g. __cpacf_query32 ? yes, not cpacf. > > Looks sane to me. >
On 17.04.19 17:43, Christian Borntraeger wrote: > > > On 17.04.19 17:42, David Hildenbrand wrote: >> On 17.04.19 17:28, Christian Borntraeger wrote: >>> Some of the new features have a 32byte response for the query function. >>> Provide a new wrapper similar to __cpacf_query. We might want to factor >>> this out if other users come up, as of today there is none. So let us >>> keep the function within KVM. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com> >>> Reviewed-by: Collin Walling <walling@linux.ibm.com> >>> --- >>> arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c | 13 +++++++++++++ >>> 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+) >>> >>> diff --git a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c >>> index ff2444d935fd..f0404960a715 100644 >>> --- a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c >>> +++ b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c >>> @@ -321,6 +321,19 @@ static inline int plo_test_bit(unsigned char nr) >>> return cc == 0; >>> } >>> >>> +static inline void __insn32_query(unsigned int opcode, u8 query[32]) >>> +{ >>> + register unsigned long r0 asm("0") = 0; /* query function */ >>> + register unsigned long r1 asm("1") = (unsigned long) query; >>> + >>> + asm volatile( >>> + /* Parameter regs are ignored */ >>> + " .insn rrf,%[opc] << 16,2,4,6,0\n" >>> + : "=m" (*query) >>> + : "d" (r0), "a" (r1), [opc] "i" (opcode) >>> + : "cc"); >>> +} >>> + >>> static void kvm_s390_cpu_feat_init(void) >>> { >>> int i; >>> >> >> Are these !cpacf functions, so the generic name "__insn32" is preferred >> over e.g. __cpacf_query32 ? > > yes, not cpacf. Reviewed-by: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
diff --git a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c index ff2444d935fd..f0404960a715 100644 --- a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c +++ b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c @@ -321,6 +321,19 @@ static inline int plo_test_bit(unsigned char nr) return cc == 0; } +static inline void __insn32_query(unsigned int opcode, u8 query[32]) +{ + register unsigned long r0 asm("0") = 0; /* query function */ + register unsigned long r1 asm("1") = (unsigned long) query; + + asm volatile( + /* Parameter regs are ignored */ + " .insn rrf,%[opc] << 16,2,4,6,0\n" + : "=m" (*query) + : "d" (r0), "a" (r1), [opc] "i" (opcode) + : "cc"); +} + static void kvm_s390_cpu_feat_init(void) { int i;