Re: [PATCH v3 02/12] KVM: arm64: selftests: Add write_sysreg_s and read_sysreg_s

On Wed, Sep 01, 2021 at 11:06:10PM +0000, Oliver Upton wrote:

On Wed, Sep 01, 2021 at 03:48:40PM -0700, Raghavendra Rao Ananta wrote:

quoted

On Wed, Sep 1, 2021 at 3:08 PM Oliver Upton [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On Wed, Sep 01, 2021 at 09:28:28PM +0000, Oliver Upton wrote:

quoted

On Wed, Sep 01, 2021 at 09:14:02PM +0000, Raghavendra Rao Ananta wrote:

quoted

For register names that are unsupported by the assembler or the ones
without architectural names, add the macros write_sysreg_s and
read_sysreg_s to support them.

The functionality is derived from kvm-unit-tests and kernel's
arch/arm64/include/asm/sysreg.h.

Signed-off-by: Raghavendra Rao Ananta <redacted>

Would it be possible to just include <asm/sysreg.h>? See
tools/arch/arm64/include/asm/sysreg.h

Geez, sorry for the noise. I mistakenly searched from the root of my
repository, not the tools/ directory.

No worries :)

quoted

In any case, you could perhaps just drop the kernel header there just to
use the exact same source for kernel and selftest.

You mean just copy/paste the entire header? There's a lot of stuff in
there which we
don't need it (yet).

Right. It's mostly register definitions, which I don't think is too high
of an overhead. Don't know where others stand, but I would prefer a
header that is equivalent between kernel & selftests over a concise
header.

Until now we haven't needed the sys_reg(...) type of definitions for
sysregs in selftests. In case we did, we defined the registers we
needed for get/set_one_reg by their parts, e.g.

 #define ID_AA64DFR0_EL1 3, 0,  0, 5, 0

allowing us to choose how we use them, ARM64_SYS_REG(...) vs.
sys_reg(...).

Bringing over sysreg.h is probably a good idea though. If we do, then
I'd suggest we define a new macro that allows us to convert a SYS_*
register definition from sysreg.h into an ARM64_SYS_REG definition
for get/set_one_reg in order to avoid redundant definitions.

Thanks,
drew