Le 14/05/2019 à 08:55, Michael Neuling a écrit :
[...]
+
+static ssize_t dawr_write_file_bool(struct file *file,
+ const char __user *user_buf,
+ size_t count, loff_t *ppos)
+{
+ struct arch_hw_breakpoint null_brk = {0, 0, 0};
+ size_t rc;
+
+ /* Send error to user if they hypervisor won't allow us to write
DAWR */
+ if ((!dawr_force_enable) &&
+ (firmware_has_feature(FW_FEATURE_LPAR)) &&
+ (set_dawr(&null_brk) != H_SUCCESS))
The above is not real clear.
set_dabr() returns 0, H_SUCCESS is not used there.
It pseries_set_dawr() will return a hcall number.
Right, then it maybe means set_dawr() should be fixes ?
Sorry, I don't understand this.
I meant set_dawr() should be fixed:
As the above test hide value 0 by using H_SUCCESS for the test, in order
to ease understanding, set_dawr() should return H_SUCCESS instead of
return 0;
Christophe
This code hasn't changed. I'm just moving it.
Right, but could be an improvment for another patch.
As far as I remember you are the one who wrote that code at first place,
arent't you ?
Yep, classic crap Mikey code :-)
Mikey
