On Thu, 23 Jul 2020 14:23:48 +0200
Janosch Frank <frankja@linux.ibm.com> wrote:

> On 7/23/20 2:01 PM, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> > On Fri, 17 Jul 2020 10:58:11 -0400
> > Janosch Frank <frankja@linux.ibm.com> wrote:
> >   
> >> Sometimes we need to do cleanup which we don't necessarily want to add
> >> to interrupt.c, so lets add a way to register a cleanup function.  
> > 
> > s/lets/let's/ :)
> >   
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Janosch Frank <frankja@linux.ibm.com>
> >> ---
> >>  lib/s390x/asm/interrupt.h | 1 +
> >>  lib/s390x/interrupt.c     | 9 +++++++++
> >>  2 files changed, 10 insertions(+)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/lib/s390x/asm/interrupt.h b/lib/s390x/asm/interrupt.h
> >> index 4cfade9..b2a7c83 100644
> >> --- a/lib/s390x/asm/interrupt.h
> >> +++ b/lib/s390x/asm/interrupt.h
> >> @@ -15,6 +15,7 @@
> >>  #define EXT_IRQ_EXTERNAL_CALL	0x1202
> >>  #define EXT_IRQ_SERVICE_SIG	0x2401
> >>  
> >> +void register_pgm_int_func(void (*f)(void));
> >>  void handle_pgm_int(void);
> >>  void handle_ext_int(void);
> >>  void handle_mcck_int(void);
> >> diff --git a/lib/s390x/interrupt.c b/lib/s390x/interrupt.c
> >> index 243b9c2..36ba720 100644
> >> --- a/lib/s390x/interrupt.c
> >> +++ b/lib/s390x/interrupt.c
> >> @@ -16,6 +16,7 @@
> >>  
> >>  static bool pgm_int_expected;
> >>  static bool ext_int_expected;
> >> +static void (*pgm_int_func)(void);
> >>  static struct lowcore *lc;
> >>  
> >>  void expect_pgm_int(void)
> >> @@ -51,8 +52,16 @@ void check_pgm_int_code(uint16_t code)
> >>  	       lc->pgm_int_code);
> >>  }
> >>  
> >> +void register_pgm_int_func(void (*f)(void))
> >> +{
> >> +	pgm_int_func = f;
> >> +}
> >> +
> >>  static void fixup_pgm_int(void)
> >>  {
> >> +	if (pgm_int_func)
> >> +		return (*pgm_int_func)();
> >> +  
> > 
> > Maybe rather call this function, if set, instead of fixup_pgm_int() in
> > handle_pgm_int()? Feels a bit cleaner to me.  
> 
> Well it's currently a cleanup function so it should be in
> fixup_pgm_int() because it fixes up.
> 
> I don't need a handler here like Pierre with his IO changes.
> 
> So it might more sense to change the name of the function ptr and
> registration function:
> 
> register_pgm_cleanup_func()
> static void (*pgm_cleanup_func)(void);

Sounds good.

But doesn't that cleanup func run instead of the 'normal' cleanup func?
I think making that distinction in handle_pgm_int() is clearer.

> 
> > 		  
> >>  	switch (lc->pgm_int_code) {
> >>  	case PGM_INT_CODE_PRIVILEGED_OPERATION:
> >>  		/* Normal operation is in supervisor state, so this exception  
> >   
> 
>