From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.9 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EDA0BC2D0DB for ; Mon, 20 Jan 2020 11:30:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B87A721569 for ; Mon, 20 Jan 2020 11:30:10 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="e+6Z/R/J" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727005AbgATLaJ (ORCPT ); Mon, 20 Jan 2020 06:30:09 -0500 Received: from us-smtp-1.mimecast.com ([207.211.31.81]:27115 "EHLO us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726451AbgATLaJ (ORCPT ); Mon, 20 Jan 2020 06:30:09 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1579519808; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=m960agLCjRzcUn/mYA4HIf0uj8dMob5viCb3ZitrCno=; b=e+6Z/R/Ji5ZH/zqnp0GFG/Wdx9jCYSq38iuLdpBYNTDoBKt8Uyiphk0CyluvVyNzCtmMyc b5TnzUtOqme6b4jcASvc/RXH87Npplx8d/AgJu4ulkOZe8wnZxVY7xdLWTeHN884rXXaZQ cSqNLtRs7HZ2aq28Iyu8qoXW2+N6QEc= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-201-ga5C8PU0MzyR-xnfr5-TBw-1; Mon, 20 Jan 2020 06:30:05 -0500 X-MC-Unique: ga5C8PU0MzyR-xnfr5-TBw-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx05.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.15]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 058DC8017CC; Mon, 20 Jan 2020 11:30:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from gondolin (ovpn-205-161.brq.redhat.com [10.40.205.161]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC75F860E0; Mon, 20 Jan 2020 11:29:59 +0000 (UTC) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2020 12:29:56 +0100 From: Cornelia Huck To: Janosch Frank Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, thuth@redhat.com, borntraeger@de.ibm.com, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, david@redhat.com Subject: Re: [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v3 7/9] s390x: smp: Remove unneeded cpu loops Message-ID: <20200120122956.6879d159.cohuck@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <20200117104640.1983-8-frankja@linux.ibm.com> References: <20200117104640.1983-1-frankja@linux.ibm.com> <20200117104640.1983-8-frankja@linux.ibm.com> Organization: Red Hat GmbH MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.15 Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: kvm@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 17 Jan 2020 05:46:38 -0500 Janosch Frank wrote: > Now that we have a loop which is executed after we return from the > main function of a secondary cpu, we can remove the surplus loops. > > Signed-off-by: Janosch Frank > --- > s390x/smp.c | 8 +------- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 7 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/s390x/smp.c b/s390x/smp.c > index 555ed72..c12a3db 100644 > --- a/s390x/smp.c > +++ b/s390x/smp.c > @@ -29,15 +29,9 @@ static void wait_for_flag(void) > } > } > > -static void cpu_loop(void) > -{ > - for (;;) {} > -} > - > static void test_func(void) > { > testflag = 1; > - cpu_loop(); > } > > static void test_start(void) > @@ -234,7 +228,7 @@ int main(void) > > /* Setting up the cpu to give it a stack and lowcore */ > psw.mask = extract_psw_mask(); > - psw.addr = (unsigned long)cpu_loop; > + psw.addr = (unsigned long)test_func; Before, you did not set testflag here... intended change? > smp_cpu_setup(1, psw); > smp_cpu_stop(1); >