| Message ID | 20200116120513.2244-8-frankja@linux.ibm.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | s390x: smp: Improve smp code and reset checks | expand |
On 16.01.20 13:05, Janosch Frank wrote: > Let's dirty the fpc, before we test if the initial reset sets it to 0. > > Signed-off-by: Janosch Frank <frankja@linux.ibm.com> > Reviewed-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> > Reviewed-by: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com> > --- > s390x/smp.c | 3 +++ > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/s390x/smp.c b/s390x/smp.c > index ce3215d..97a9dda 100644 > --- a/s390x/smp.c > +++ b/s390x/smp.c > @@ -179,6 +179,9 @@ static void test_emcall(void) > /* Used to dirty registers of cpu #1 before it is reset */ > static void test_func_initial(void) > { > + asm volatile( > + " sfpc %0\n" > + : : "d" (0x11) : ); FWIW, I'd make this one easier to read asm volatile("sfpc %0\n" :: "d" (0x11)); or sth like that Reviewed-by: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com> > lctlg(1, 0x42000UL); > lctlg(7, 0x43000UL); > lctlg(13, 0x44000UL); >
On 17/01/2020 11.20, David Hildenbrand wrote: > On 16.01.20 13:05, Janosch Frank wrote: >> Let's dirty the fpc, before we test if the initial reset sets it to 0. >> >> Signed-off-by: Janosch Frank <frankja@linux.ibm.com> >> Reviewed-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> >> Reviewed-by: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com> >> --- >> s390x/smp.c | 3 +++ >> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/s390x/smp.c b/s390x/smp.c >> index ce3215d..97a9dda 100644 >> --- a/s390x/smp.c >> +++ b/s390x/smp.c >> @@ -179,6 +179,9 @@ static void test_emcall(void) >> /* Used to dirty registers of cpu #1 before it is reset */ >> static void test_func_initial(void) >> { >> + asm volatile( >> + " sfpc %0\n" >> + : : "d" (0x11) : ); > > FWIW, I'd make this one easier to read > > asm volatile("sfpc %0\n" :: "d" (0x11)); By the way, since it's only one line, you can also drop the \n here. Thomas
On 1/17/20 11:29 AM, Thomas Huth wrote: > On 17/01/2020 11.20, David Hildenbrand wrote: >> On 16.01.20 13:05, Janosch Frank wrote: >>> Let's dirty the fpc, before we test if the initial reset sets it to 0. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Janosch Frank <frankja@linux.ibm.com> >>> Reviewed-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> >>> Reviewed-by: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com> >>> --- >>> s390x/smp.c | 3 +++ >>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) >>> >>> diff --git a/s390x/smp.c b/s390x/smp.c >>> index ce3215d..97a9dda 100644 >>> --- a/s390x/smp.c >>> +++ b/s390x/smp.c >>> @@ -179,6 +179,9 @@ static void test_emcall(void) >>> /* Used to dirty registers of cpu #1 before it is reset */ >>> static void test_func_initial(void) >>> { >>> + asm volatile( >>> + " sfpc %0\n" >>> + : : "d" (0x11) : ); >> >> FWIW, I'd make this one easier to read >> >> asm volatile("sfpc %0\n" :: "d" (0x11)); > > By the way, since it's only one line, you can also drop the \n here. > > Thomas > Both suggestions applied :) Thanks!
diff --git a/s390x/smp.c b/s390x/smp.c index ce3215d..97a9dda 100644 --- a/s390x/smp.c +++ b/s390x/smp.c @@ -179,6 +179,9 @@ static void test_emcall(void) /* Used to dirty registers of cpu #1 before it is reset */ static void test_func_initial(void) { + asm volatile( + " sfpc %0\n" + : : "d" (0x11) : ); lctlg(1, 0x42000UL); lctlg(7, 0x43000UL); lctlg(13, 0x44000UL);