On 08/09/2018 05:17 AM, Harald Freudenberger wrote:
On 09.08.2018 11:06, Cornelia Huck wrote:
On Wed,  8 Aug 2018 10:44:14 -0400
Tony Krowiak <akrow...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:

From: Harald Freudenberger <fre...@de.ibm.com>

Move all the inline functions from the ap bus header
file ap_asm.h into the in-kernel api header file
arch/s390/include/asm/ap.h so that KVM can make use
of all the low level AP functions.

Signed-off-by: Harald Freudenberger <fre...@de.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: Christian Borntraeger <borntrae...@de.ibm.com>
You should add your own s-o-b if you are sending on patches written by
others (even if it does not matter in the end, when they are merged
through a different path anyway.)

---
  arch/s390/include/asm/ap.h     |  284 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
  drivers/s390/crypto/ap_asm.h   |  261 ------------------------------------
  drivers/s390/crypto/ap_bus.c   |   21 +---
  drivers/s390/crypto/ap_bus.h   |    1 +
  drivers/s390/crypto/ap_card.c  |    1 -
  drivers/s390/crypto/ap_queue.c |    1 -
  6 files changed, 259 insertions(+), 310 deletions(-)
  delete mode 100644 drivers/s390/crypto/ap_asm.h

diff --git a/arch/s390/include/asm/ap.h b/arch/s390/include/asm/ap.h
index c1bedb4..046e044 100644
--- a/arch/s390/include/asm/ap.h
+++ b/arch/s390/include/asm/ap.h
@@ -47,6 +47,50 @@ struct ap_queue_status {
  };
/**
+ * ap_intructions_available() - Test if AP instructions are available.
+ *
+ * Returns 0 if the AP instructions are installed.
Stumbled over this when I was looking at the usage in patch 7: if I see
a function called '_available' return 0, I'd assume that whatever the
function tests for is *not* available.

Rather call this function ap_instructions_check_availability() (and
keep the return code convention), or switch this to return 0 if not
available and !0 if available?
Good catch, Cony you are right. I'll fix this to return 1 if AP instructions
are available and 0 if not. However, this patch will come via Martin's pipe
to the Linus Torwald kernel sources.

Is your intent to simply indicate whether the AP instructions are available or not; or is the intention to indicate whether the AP instructions are available
and if not, they why? In the former, then I agree that a boolean should be
returned; however, if the case is the latter, then what you have is fine but
maybe the function name should be changed as Connie suggests.

+ */
+static inline int ap_instructions_available(void)
+{
+       register unsigned long reg0 asm ("0") = AP_MKQID(0, 0);
+       register unsigned long reg1 asm ("1") = -ENODEV;
+       register unsigned long reg2 asm ("2");
+
+       asm volatile(
+               "   .long 0xb2af0000\n"               /* PQAP(TAPQ) */
+               "0: la    %0,0\n"
+               "1:\n"
+               EX_TABLE(0b, 1b)
+               : "+d" (reg1), "=d" (reg2)
+               : "d" (reg0)
+               : "cc");
+       return reg1;
+}
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-s390" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


Reply via email to