Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] x86emul/test: fix 32-bit build

[Andrew Cooper]

On 10/02/17 07:38, Jan Beulich wrote:
> Commit 7603eb256 ("x86emul: use eflags definitions in x86-defns.h")
> removed the EFLG_* definitions without updating the use sites (which
> - oddly enough - happen to all be in 32-bit only code paths).
>
> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich 

Reviewed-by: Andrew Cooper 

___
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] x86emul/test: fix 32-bit build

[Jan Beulich]

>>> On 10.02.17 at 09:15,  wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 12:38:51AM -0700, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> Commit 7603eb256 ("x86emul: use eflags definitions in x86-defns.h")
>> removed the EFLG_* definitions without updating the use sites (which
>> - oddly enough - happen to all be in 32-bit only code paths).
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich 
> 
> Reviewed-by: Wei Liu 

Thanks.

> And I also notice that this directory is not built by default, hence it
> slipped my pre-commit build test (which does 32bit build as well) and
> oostest build test.

And we shouldn't try to build this by default, as it definitely
requires a much newer tool chain than what our base requirement
is.

Jan


___
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] x86emul/test: fix 32-bit build

[Wei Liu]

On Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 12:38:51AM -0700, Jan Beulich wrote:
> Commit 7603eb256 ("x86emul: use eflags definitions in x86-defns.h")
> removed the EFLG_* definitions without updating the use sites (which
> - oddly enough - happen to all be in 32-bit only code paths).
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich 

Reviewed-by: Wei Liu 

Ah sorry! I would have sworn I did several mechanical replaces, but
apparently something went wrong...

And I also notice that this directory is not built by default, hence it
slipped my pre-commit build test (which does 32bit build as well) and
oostest build test.

Wei.

___
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel

[Xen-devel] [PATCH] x86emul/test: fix 32-bit build

[Jan Beulich]

Commit 7603eb256 ("x86emul: use eflags definitions in x86-defns.h")
removed the EFLG_* definitions without updating the use sites (which
- oddly enough - happen to all be in 32-bit only code paths).

Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich 

--- a/tools/tests/x86_emulator/test_x86_emulator.c
+++ b/tools/tests/x86_emulator/test_x86_emulator.c
@@ -497,7 +497,7 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv)
 if ( (rc != X86EMUL_OKAY) ||
  (*res != 0x1112) ||
  (regs.ecx != 0x) ||
- !(regs.eflags & EFLG_ZF) ||
+ !(regs.eflags & X86_EFLAGS_ZF) ||
  (regs.eip != (unsigned long)[2]) )
 goto fail;
 #else
@@ -571,11 +571,11 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv)
 
 #ifndef __x86_64__
 printf("%-40s", "Testing daa/das (all inputs)...");
-/* Bits 0-7: AL; Bit 8: EFLG_AF; Bit 9: EFLG_CF; Bit 10: DAA vs. DAS. */
+/* Bits 0-7: AL; Bit 8: EFLAGS.AF; Bit 9: EFLAGS.CF; Bit 10: DAA vs. DAS. 
*/
 for ( i = 0; i < 0x800; i++ )
 {
-regs.eflags  = (i & 0x200) ? EFLG_CF : 0;
-regs.eflags |= (i & 0x100) ? EFLG_AF : 0;
+regs.eflags  = (i & 0x200) ? X86_EFLAGS_CF : 0;
+regs.eflags |= (i & 0x100) ? X86_EFLAGS_AF : 0;
 if ( i & 0x400 )
 __asm__ (
 "pushf; and $0xffee,(%%esp); or %1,(%%esp); popf; das; "
@@ -588,24 +588,24 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv)
 "pushf; popl %1"
 : "=a" (bcdres_native), "=r" (regs.eflags)
 : "0" (i & 0xff), "1" (regs.eflags) );
-bcdres_native |= (regs.eflags & EFLG_PF) ? 0x1000 : 0;
-bcdres_native |= (regs.eflags & EFLG_ZF) ? 0x800 : 0;
-bcdres_native |= (regs.eflags & EFLG_SF) ? 0x400 : 0;
-bcdres_native |= (regs.eflags & EFLG_CF) ? 0x200 : 0;
-bcdres_native |= (regs.eflags & EFLG_AF) ? 0x100 : 0;
+bcdres_native |= (regs.eflags & X86_EFLAGS_PF) ? 0x1000 : 0;
+bcdres_native |= (regs.eflags & X86_EFLAGS_ZF) ? 0x800 : 0;
+bcdres_native |= (regs.eflags & X86_EFLAGS_SF) ? 0x400 : 0;
+bcdres_native |= (regs.eflags & X86_EFLAGS_CF) ? 0x200 : 0;
+bcdres_native |= (regs.eflags & X86_EFLAGS_AF) ? 0x100 : 0;
 
 instr[0] = (i & 0x400) ? 0x2f: 0x27; /* daa/das */
-regs.eflags  = (i & 0x200) ? EFLG_CF : 0;
-regs.eflags |= (i & 0x100) ? EFLG_AF : 0;
+regs.eflags  = (i & 0x200) ? X86_EFLAGS_CF : 0;
+regs.eflags |= (i & 0x100) ? X86_EFLAGS_AF : 0;
 regs.eip= (unsigned long)[0];
 regs.eax= (unsigned char)i;
 rc = x86_emulate(, );
 bcdres_emul  = regs.eax;
-bcdres_emul |= (regs.eflags & EFLG_PF) ? 0x1000 : 0;
-bcdres_emul |= (regs.eflags & EFLG_ZF) ? 0x800 : 0;
-bcdres_emul |= (regs.eflags & EFLG_SF) ? 0x400 : 0;
-bcdres_emul |= (regs.eflags & EFLG_CF) ? 0x200 : 0;
-bcdres_emul |= (regs.eflags & EFLG_AF) ? 0x100 : 0;
+bcdres_emul |= (regs.eflags & X86_EFLAGS_PF) ? 0x1000 : 0;
+bcdres_emul |= (regs.eflags & X86_EFLAGS_ZF) ? 0x800 : 0;
+bcdres_emul |= (regs.eflags & X86_EFLAGS_SF) ? 0x400 : 0;
+bcdres_emul |= (regs.eflags & X86_EFLAGS_CF) ? 0x200 : 0;
+bcdres_emul |= (regs.eflags & X86_EFLAGS_AF) ? 0x100 : 0;
 if ( (rc != X86EMUL_OKAY) || (regs.eax > 255) ||
  (regs.eip != (unsigned long)[1]) )
 goto fail;



x86emul/test: fix 32-bit build

Commit 7603eb256 ("x86emul: use eflags definitions in x86-defns.h")
removed the EFLG_* definitions without updating the use sites (which
- oddly enough - happen to all be in 32-bit only code paths).

Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich 

--- a/tools/tests/x86_emulator/test_x86_emulator.c
+++ b/tools/tests/x86_emulator/test_x86_emulator.c
@@ -497,7 +497,7 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv)
 if ( (rc != X86EMUL_OKAY) ||
  (*res != 0x1112) ||
  (regs.ecx != 0x) ||
- !(regs.eflags & EFLG_ZF) ||
+ !(regs.eflags & X86_EFLAGS_ZF) ||
  (regs.eip != (unsigned long)[2]) )
 goto fail;
 #else
@@ -571,11 +571,11 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv)
 
 #ifndef __x86_64__
 printf("%-40s", "Testing daa/das (all inputs)...");
-/* Bits 0-7: AL; Bit 8: EFLG_AF; Bit 9: EFLG_CF; Bit 10: DAA vs. DAS. */
+/* Bits 0-7: AL; Bit 8: EFLAGS.AF; Bit 9: EFLAGS.CF; Bit 10: DAA vs. DAS. 
*/
 for ( i = 0; i < 0x800; i++ )
 {
-regs.eflags  = (i & 0x200) ? EFLG_CF : 0;
-regs.eflags |= (i & 0x100) ? EFLG_AF : 0;
+regs.eflags  = (i & 0x200) ? X86_EFLAGS_CF : 0;
+regs.eflags |= (i & 0x100) ? X86_EFLAGS_AF : 0;
 if ( i & 0x400 )
 __asm__ (
 "pushf; and $0xffee,(%%esp); or %1,(%%esp); popf; das; "
@@ -588,24 +588,24 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv)
 "pushf; popl %1"
 : "=a" (bcdres_native), "=r" (regs.eflags)
 : "0" (i & 0xff), "1" (regs.eflags) );
-