From: Janosch Frank <frankja@linux.ibm.com>
To: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>
Cc: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com>,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org,
david@redhat.com, borntraeger@de.ibm.com, imbrenda@linux.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v2 3/3] s390x: Ultravisor guest API test
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2020 11:06:25 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <16eee269-d773-26df-a517-08f2265318c4@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200731104205.37add810.cohuck@redhat.com>
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3138 bytes --]
On 7/31/20 10:42 AM, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> On Fri, 31 Jul 2020 09:34:41 +0200
> Janosch Frank <frankja@linux.ibm.com> wrote:
>
>> On 7/30/20 5:58 PM, Thomas Huth wrote:
>>> On 30/07/2020 13.16, Cornelia Huck wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 27 Jul 2020 05:54:15 -0400
>>>> Janosch Frank <frankja@linux.ibm.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Test the error conditions of guest 2 Ultravisor calls, namely:
>>>>> * Query Ultravisor information
>>>>> * Set shared access
>>>>> * Remove shared access
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Janosch Frank <frankja@linux.ibm.com>
>>>>> Reviewed-by: Claudio Imbrenda <imbrenda@linux.ibm.com>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> lib/s390x/asm/uv.h | 68 +++++++++++++++++++
>>>>> s390x/Makefile | 1 +
>>>>> s390x/unittests.cfg | 3 +
>>>>> s390x/uv-guest.c | 159 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>> 4 files changed, 231 insertions(+)
>>>>> create mode 100644 lib/s390x/asm/uv.h
>>>>> create mode 100644 s390x/uv-guest.c
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> (...)
>>>>
>>>>> +static inline int uv_call(unsigned long r1, unsigned long r2)
>>>>> +{
>>>>> + int cc;
>>>>> +
>>>>> + asm volatile(
>>>>> + "0: .insn rrf,0xB9A40000,%[r1],%[r2],0,0\n"
>>>>> + " brc 3,0b\n"
>>>>> + " ipm %[cc]\n"
>>>>> + " srl %[cc],28\n"
>>>>> + : [cc] "=d" (cc)
>>>>> + : [r1] "a" (r1), [r2] "a" (r2)
>>>>> + : "memory", "cc");
>>>>> + return cc;
>>>>> +}
>>>>
>>>> This returns the condition code, but no caller seems to check it
>>>> (instead, they look at header.rc, which is presumably only set if the
>>>> instruction executed successfully in some way?)
>>>>
>>>> Looking at the kernel, it retries for cc > 1 (presumably busy
>>>> conditions), and cc != 0 seems to be considered a failure. Do we want
>>>> to look at the cc here as well?
>>>
>>> It's there - but here it's in the assembly code, the "brc 3,0b".
>
> Ah yes, I missed that.
>
>>
>> Yes, we needed to factor that out in KVM because we sometimes need to
>> schedule and then it looks nicer handling that in C code. The branch on
>> condition will jump back for cc 2 and 3. cc 0 and 1 are success and
>> error respectively and only then the rc and rrc in the UV header are set.
>
> Yeah, it's a bit surprising that rc/rrc are also set with cc 1.
Is it?
The (r)rc *only* contain meaningful information on CC 1.
On CC 0 they will simply say everything is fine which CC 0 states
already anyway.
>
> (Can you add a comment? Just so that it is clear that callers never
> need to check the cc, as rc/rrc already contain more information than
> that.)
I'd rather fix my test code and also check the CC.
I did check it for my other UV tests so I've no idea why I didn't do it
here...
How about adding a comment for the cc 2/3 case?
"The brc instruction will take care of the cc 2/3 case where we need to
continue the execution because we were interrupted.
The inline assembly will only return on success/error i.e. cc 0/1."
>
>>
>>>
>>> Patch looks ok to me (but I didn't do a full review):
>>>
>>> Acked-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com>
>>>
>>
>>
>
[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-07-31 9:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-07-27 9:54 [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v2 0/3] PV tests part 1 Janosch Frank
2020-07-27 9:54 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v2 1/3] s390x: Add custom pgm cleanup function Janosch Frank
2020-07-30 10:53 ` Cornelia Huck
2020-07-27 9:54 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v2 2/3] s390x: skrf: Add exception new skey test and add test to unittests.cfg Janosch Frank
2020-07-27 12:20 ` Thomas Huth
2020-07-27 12:38 ` Janosch Frank
2020-07-30 11:03 ` Cornelia Huck
2020-07-27 9:54 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v2 3/3] s390x: Ultravisor guest API test Janosch Frank
2020-07-30 11:16 ` Cornelia Huck
2020-07-30 15:58 ` Thomas Huth
2020-07-31 7:34 ` Janosch Frank
2020-07-31 8:42 ` Cornelia Huck
2020-07-31 9:06 ` Janosch Frank [this message]
2020-07-31 9:21 ` Cornelia Huck
2020-08-07 11:15 [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v2 0/3] PV tests part 1 Janosch Frank
2020-08-07 11:15 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v2 3/3] s390x: Ultravisor guest API test Janosch Frank
2020-08-07 12:14 ` Thomas Huth
2020-08-10 14:50 ` Cornelia Huck
2020-08-10 15:27 ` Janosch Frank
2020-08-10 15:32 ` Cornelia Huck
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=16eee269-d773-26df-a517-08f2265318c4@linux.ibm.com \
--to=frankja@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=borntraeger@de.ibm.com \
--cc=cohuck@redhat.com \
--cc=david@redhat.com \
--cc=imbrenda@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=thuth@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).