[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [qemu-s390x] [kvm-unit-tests PATCH 2/5] s390x: Switch to z/Arch if n

From: David Hildenbrand
Subject: Re: [qemu-s390x] [kvm-unit-tests PATCH 2/5] s390x: Switch to z/Arch if needed
Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2018 11:22:24 +0100
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.3.1

>>> +   /* Switch to z/Architecture mode (64-bit) */
>>> +   slr     %r0, %r0                # set cpuid to zero
>>> +   lhi     %r1, 2                  # mode 2 = esame
>>> +   sigp    %r1, %r0, 0x12          # sigp set arch
>>> +   bras    %r13,0f
>>> +   .fill   16,4,0x0
>>> +0: lmh     %r0,%r15,0(%r13)        # clear high-order half of gprs
>> This is just what the kernel does. The ".fill" part is confusing at
>> first, but it is just the data loaded into the high-order halfs (all 0s)
>> (I was told mixing code and data is bad practice, but for some reason
>> people in Linux decided to do it like that (maybe because of some
>> relocation thingy? or because of instruction set restrictions?))
> Honestly I wouldn't even have considered clearing if I haven't seen it
> in the kernel. I could define a zero area at the end of the file or do
> an lm targeting the cleared bss right before jumping into setup. Or we
> could do 16 xc register to register :)

Or we'll just stick to what the kernel did here ... at least that way we
can be pretty sure we don't make mistakes. Whatever you prefer ;)

>> Should we introduce defines for SIGPs? We might have more once we
>> support multiple CPUs eiher way.
> We also have sigp stop so why not.
> How about making the indent patch a cleanup patch and adding all
> commands there?

Sure, fine with me!



David / dhildenb

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]