Re: [RFC PATCH 4/4] KVM: selftests: Add the sync_regs test for s390x

2019-05-23 Thread Thomas Huth
On 23/05/2019 12.56, Andrew Jones wrote: > On Thu, May 16, 2019 at 01:12:53PM +0200, Thomas Huth wrote: >> The test is an adaption of the same test for x86. Note that there >> are some differences in the way how s390x deals with the kvm_valid_regs >> in struct kvm_run, so some of the tests had to b

Re: [RFC PATCH 4/4] KVM: selftests: Add the sync_regs test for s390x

2019-05-23 Thread Andrew Jones
On Thu, May 16, 2019 at 01:12:53PM +0200, Thomas Huth wrote: > The test is an adaption of the same test for x86. Note that there > are some differences in the way how s390x deals with the kvm_valid_regs > in struct kvm_run, so some of the tests had to be removed. Also this > test is not using the u

Re: [RFC PATCH 4/4] KVM: selftests: Add the sync_regs test for s390x

2019-05-20 Thread Paolo Bonzini
On 16/05/19 13:12, Thomas Huth wrote: > +#define VCPU_ID 5 > + > +static void guest_code(void) > +{ > + for (;;) { > + asm volatile ("diag 0,0,0x501"); > + asm volatile ("ahi 11,1"); > + } I'd like this to use something like register u32 stage = 0 asm("11")