From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com [148.163.158.5]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 619EA3A5436; Fri, 25 Sep 2026 08:45:26 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=148.163.158.5 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1790325929; cv=none; b=OMHayU2F9ClYu/mwmbqokLZ8VRe+RDuKxMa9NTO8UHfJkT6ihZxoDXxChC05zh+G3lp13VgCVQ4k38SeUMQznERErJHEN3CLDoGlYOxDpkUI3xy/SS+h2GkABT+bwFEYpfojzvj0wjcMVvrmbsmkJUYU7Um5iLhWLbyoqdMXv7A= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1790325929; c=relaxed/simple; bh=J/nvE5eYJpS0kIo0tIMt5vOFhmfBJFQUnBTgMp5546c=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=cJLOliqldhv/UyPibHly+BUE8VR3nNyjqsES6/S3w1t+Pdqt2P5SqWsqynedcakCYFHmXLvTWC4cKh8XbKrU29ON3wSlukOMKIYt1hrO8XG5uRkWhvkEqlRMB7xvTyIFjpw2uEQjFLL8UarToYpmstPGc93JctSZ+uXbN1KqMLM= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.ibm.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.ibm.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=ibm.com header.i=@ibm.com header.b=p3huYxFH; arc=none smtp.client-ip=148.163.158.5 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.ibm.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.ibm.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=ibm.com header.i=@ibm.com header.b="p3huYxFH" Received: from pps.filterd (m0356516.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.18.1.11/8.18.1.11) with ESMTP id 68P4ZuCw4104239; Fri, 25 Sep 2026 08:44:31 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ibm.com; h=cc :content-type:date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :references:subject:to; s=pp1; bh=2de9xHNjmPAOVaG2ifsPQ33bU5QHct L9cV7tymsHQY0=; b=p3huYxFHoSEQncV4QHHXzz9lN66r41EH9qE+HH2FTWFAo5 h/zba0v1i+C0lHm8p2oh9LrPWVV3JhMXJRxLFZdaiKbbx78fnhoRNxy3VsNT261u bOl1eIgrFHbcrLXw+wr961mlSwl/0x47DzjqFGscKv1Z2XQo5YHvdhbHwvJ/B67N RoylsQAfclr6bKM/i7XgIxeHGJuwlQzJkx7+sn+KWg+ZW8EfSpKI3oV0+kp8R6Ef M+UIn9ZkBXlwgq5Ra5CRDPgCDKq4OfWB+dP1dpoNuFNSn2sM8P0NVMsKNkfB4/GG o5fFDUTtUg7Pcb+/6QZNnYiMoUzfXOw8A4Zzf+1w== Received: from ppma13.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (dd.9e.1632.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [50.22.158.221]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 4gske1w7vm-1 (version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 25 Sep 2026 08:44:29 +0000 (GMT) Received: from pps.filterd (ppma13.dal12v.mail.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma13.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (8.18.1.11/8.18.1.11) with ESMTP id 68P4lYGl1959512; Fri, 25 Sep 2026 08:44:28 GMT Received: from smtprelay02.fra02v.mail.ibm.com ([9.218.2.226]) by ppma13.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 4gvu7edxau-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 25 Sep 2026 08:44:28 +0000 (GMT) Received: from smtpav04.fra02v.mail.ibm.com (smtpav04.fra02v.mail.ibm.com [10.20.54.103]) by smtprelay02.fra02v.mail.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 68P8iPQw28836176 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 25 Sep 2026 08:44:25 GMT Received: from smtpav04.fra02v.mail.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF1762004B; Fri, 25 Sep 2026 08:44:24 +0000 (GMT) Received: from smtpav04.fra02v.mail.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39CD820043; Fri, 25 Sep 2026 08:44:23 +0000 (GMT) Received: from osiris (unknown [9.111.31.68]) by smtpav04.fra02v.mail.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Fri, 25 Sep 2026 08:44:23 +0000 (GMT) Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2026 10:44:21 +0200 From: Heiko Carstens To: Mukesh Kumar Chaurasiya Cc: Peter Zijlstra , catalin.marinas@arm.com, will@kernel.org, mark.rutland@arm.com, maddy@linux.ibm.com, mpe@ellerman.id.au, npiggin@gmail.com, chleroy@kernel.org, ritesh.list@gmail.com, sshegde@linux.ibm.com, pjw@kernel.org, palmer@dabbelt.com, aou@eecs.berkeley.edu, alex@ghiti.fr, gor@linux.ibm.com, agordeev@linux.ibm.com, borntraeger@linux.ibm.com, svens@linux.ibm.com, tglx@kernel.org, mingo@redhat.com, bp@alien8.de, dave.hansen@linux.intel.com, x86@kernel.org, hpa@zytor.com, ojeda@kernel.org, boqun@kernel.org, gary@garyguo.net, bjorn3_gh@protonmail.com, lossin@kernel.org, a.hindborg@kernel.org, aliceryhl@google.com, tmgross@umich.edu, dakr@kernel.org, daniel.almeida@collabora.com, tamird@kernel.org, acourbot@nvidia.com, work@onurozkan.dev, nathan@kernel.org, ndesaulniers@google.com, morbo@google.com, justinstitt@google.com, jszhang@kernel.org, japo@linux.ibm.com, jpoimboe@kernel.org, seanjc@google.com, pmladek@suse.com, thuth@redhat.com, ynorov@nvidia.com, joelagnelf@nvidia.com, david@davidgow.net, fujita.tomonori@gmail.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, rust-for-linux@vger.kernel.org, llvm@lists.linux.dev Subject: Re: [RFC] rust: kernel: Add KUnit tests for ARCH_WARN_ASM bug table emission Message-ID: <20260925084421.23528Afe-hca@linux.ibm.com> References: <20260922054959.955093-2-mkchauras@gmail.com> <20260922064735.GS4121339@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20260924111557.GP1837346@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20260924151335.18402A8b-hca@linux.ibm.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-Reinject: loops=2 maxloops=12 X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: 87lA0aCgX2z2D3O1YImj8y7jkpHmz4CB X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details-Enc: AW1haW4tMjYwOTI1MDAzNCBTYWx0ZWRfXyKhVgC1T7hXc V/4zpWORmrgXaPIYCPqnXQh+/XRSwR1UXNgV2YvLqkokz4XTbTo2lSCIo2oGyHP5I/BQxBbtksw OLPZx6zdmUHojKQonoku7cjqsdZoePEMaX0dEzbcuBAjpuNDcXWXe3/vUlCZJCpBd1Ovtom/noX MmniggVMhfgZ4L07KrgtwHhet7Eir9r3Xd+hvhCrbn95SRLiCdjhLNRQOT1IocKdr6r3LvwTadO y4CSA8jcRzWbkgfE23lR/ONSq0zsrCi65ubnC6woMeUNsQI0j9K2e5fXc2TQHy5gh1QKHLNc17Y OAKjpKoYQ7Qn9zZ/n69xqyFwRfiWN33KM1gJzZ/57d5EDtrsVvAoPaozHfnjajPwokHT1TRbBU9 QhA36CoSDk/x1vOSIIwGzAn4zrb42OphDQSjxR+zQe/DJOGEddcYVSIoiECr93Fdhd/S9YsZJa3 kKlU0vrfYgVZwYwHzZg== X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.4 cv=O/KsLx9W c=1 sm=1 tr=0 ts=6ab6346e cx=c_pps a=AfN7/Ok6k8XGzOShvHwTGQ==:117 a=AfN7/Ok6k8XGzOShvHwTGQ==:17 a=kj9zAlcOel0A:10 a=VdqzKS8jKosA:10 a=VkNPw1HP01LnGYTKEx00:22 a=RnoormkPH1_aCDwRdu11:22 a=Y2IxJ9c9Rs8Kov3niI8_:22 a=kNr3sdrnxbR47e0HQjsA:9 a=CjuIK1q_8ugA:10 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Info: AW1haW4tMjYwOTI1MDAzNCBTYWx0ZWRfXy9BY6yI3+QWb ojtvWdD5I9GgEO2EI/5q1+KsJFtrN8hUGDyFDrjjLiBS4udvzPoklpbszwigPS0vRy/fC9pj/Ag cPRsb7OwEtSlA8sDaU+DGjpOMGVPE3o= X-Proofpoint-GUID: rzTFMSH6Roqit0uEX2DfQ6jw3cCbmDAk X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.293,Aquarius:18.0.1176,Hydra:6.1.134,FMLib:17.12.100.49 definitions=2026-09-25_02,2026-09-21_02,2025-10-01_01 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 clxscore=1015 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 impostorscore=0 suspectscore=0 bulkscore=0 priorityscore=1501 lowpriorityscore=0 adultscore=0 spamscore=0 classifier=typeunknown authscore=0 authtc= authcc= route=outbound adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.22.0-2609040000 definitions=main-2609250034 On Fri, Sep 25, 2026 at 12:06:28PM +0530, Mukesh Kumar Chaurasiya wrote: > On Thu, Sep 24, 2026 at 05:13:35PM +0200, Heiko Carstens wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 24, 2026 at 01:15:57PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > Untested thingies for arm64 and s390x. > > > int is_valid_bugaddr(unsigned long addr) > > > { > > > - return 1; > > > + u16 insn; > > > + > > > + if (get_kernel_nofault(insn, (u16 *)addr)) > > > + return 0; > > > + > > > + return insn == 0x0001 || insn == 0x000e; > > > > I have no idea why anybody wants to do this, but it looks like I'm not > > alone :) In any case: the check is wrong. > > s390 uses only the monitor call instruction and this should be > > > > return insn == 0xaf00; > > should i send this out along with ppc. I am not paricularly very good > with s390's assembly, but if this looks correct to you, i can send it > out. No, I still don't get what this fixes, or what the improvement would be (also not after reading you reply to Mark). The current code is fine for s390. Unless there is a pressing need I'd like to keep it as it is.