[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Y7R7+BIEvFdxMJIu@osiris>
Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2023 20:03:20 +0100
From: Heiko Carstens <hca@...ux.ibm.com>
To: Sven Schnelle <svens@...ux.ibm.com>
Cc: Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>, "Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@...il.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/5] selftests/nolibc: add s390 support
On Tue, Jan 03, 2023 at 08:19:55AM +0100, Sven Schnelle wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Sven Schnelle <svens@...ux.ibm.com>
> Acked-by: Heiko Carstens <hca@...ux.ibm.com>
> ---
> tools/testing/selftests/nolibc/Makefile | 7 ++++++-
> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
...
> -CFLAGS ?= -Os -fno-ident -fno-asynchronous-unwind-tables
> +CFLAGS_s390 = -m64
> +CFLAGS ?= -Os -fno-ident -fno-asynchronous-unwind-tables $(CFLAGS_$(ARCH))
Since this adds support for architecture specific compile flags, you
might as well want to add -march=z10, since that's the minimum
architecture level for the kernel we support anyway.
That way you won't end up with problems like the lay instruction, and
could also use cghsi for zero comparison. Not that I'm proposing that
you should change the asm code again, it is fine as it is now.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists