On 18/08/15 18:15, David Gibson wrote:
On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 09:52:00AM +1000, Gavin Shan wrote:
On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 10:32:13AM -0700, Thomas Huth wrote:
On 17/08/15 18:47, Gavin Shan wrote:
The patch supports RTAS calls "ibm,{open,close}-errinjct" to
manupliate the token, which is passed to RTAS call "ibm,errinjct"
to indicate the valid context for error injection. Each VM is
permitted to have only one token at once and we simply have one
random number for that.
Looking at the code, you're using a sequence number now instead of a
random number?
Yes, it's what Alexey suggested.
Then please update the commit message accordingly.
diff --git a/hw/ppc/spapr_rtas.c b/hw/ppc/spapr_rtas.c
index e99e25f..8405056 100644
--- a/hw/ppc/spapr_rtas.c
+++ b/hw/ppc/spapr_rtas.c
@@ -604,6 +604,68 @@ out:
rtas_st(rets, 0, rc);
}
+static void rtas_ibm_open_errinjct(PowerPCCPU *cpu,
+ sPAPRMachineState *spapr,
+ uint32_t token, uint32_t nargs,
+ target_ulong args, uint32_t nret,
+ target_ulong rets)
+{
+ int32_t ret;
+
+ /* Sanity check on number of arguments */
+ if ((nargs != 0) || (nret != 2)) {
Uh, did Alexey infect you with paranthesitis?
hehe~, nope. I'll drop those unnecessary paranthesitis :-)
I'd prefer you didn't. Unlike Thomas, I also don't remember C order
of ops that well and would prefer the clarity.
You can always look it up if you're unsure, e.g.:
http://en.cppreference.com/w/c/language/operator_precedence
And once you've learnt it, the additional paranthesis just look
cumbersome. So please remove them!