Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 8/9] spapr: Implement processor compatibility in ibm, client-architecture-support

[Alexey Kardashevskiy]

On 05/17/2014 06:46 AM, Alexander Graf wrote:
> 
> On 16.05.14 17:57, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
>> On 05/17/2014 12:16 AM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>>> On 15.05.14 13:28, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
>>>> Modern Linux kernels support last POWERPC CPUs so when a kernel boots,
>>>> in most cases it can find a matching cpu_spec in the kernel's cpu_specs
>>>> list. However if the kernel is quite old, it may be missing a definition
>>>> of the actual CPU. To provide an ability for old kernels to work on modern
>>>> hardware, a Processor Compatibility Mode has been introduced
>>>> by the PowerISA specification.
>>>>
>>>>   From the hardware prospective, it is supported by the Processor
>>>> Compatibility Register (PCR) which is defined in PowerISA. The register
>>>> enables one of the compatibility modes (2.05/2.06/2.07).
>>>> Since PCR is a hypervisor privileged register and cannot be
>>>> accessed from the guest, the mode selection is done via
>>>> ibm,client-architecture-support (CAS) RTAS call using which the guest
>>>> specifies what "raw" and "architected" CPU versions it supports.
>>>> QEMU works out the best match, changes a "cpu-version" property of
>>>> every CPU and notifies the guest about the change by setting these
>>>> properties in the buffer passed as a response on a custom H_CAS hypercall.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Alexey Kardashevskiy <address@hidden>
>>>> ---
>>>>    hw/ppc/spapr.c       | 40 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>    hw/ppc/spapr_hcall.c | 83
>>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>    trace-events         |  5 ++++
>>>>    3 files changed, 128 insertions(+)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/hw/ppc/spapr.c b/hw/ppc/spapr.c
>>>> index a2c9106..a0882a1 100644
>>>> --- a/hw/ppc/spapr.c
>>>> +++ b/hw/ppc/spapr.c
>>>> @@ -35,6 +35,7 @@
>>>>    #include "kvm_ppc.h"
>>>>    #include "mmu-hash64.h"
>>>>    #include "cpu-models.h"
>>>> +#include "qom/cpu.h"
>>>>      #include "hw/boards.h"
>>>>    #include "hw/ppc/ppc.h"
>>>> @@ -592,11 +593,50 @@ int spapr_h_cas_compose_response(target_ulong addr,
>>>> target_ulong size)
>>>>    {
>>>>        void *fdt;
>>>>        sPAPRDeviceTreeUpdateHeader hdr = { .version_id = 1 };
>>>> +    CPUState *cs;
>>>> +    int smt = kvmppc_smt_threads();
>>>>          size -= sizeof(hdr);
>>>>          fdt = g_malloc0(size);
>>>>        _FDT((fdt_create(fdt, size)));
>>>> +    _FDT((fdt_begin_node(fdt, "cpus")));
>>>> +
>>>> +    CPU_FOREACH(cs) {
>>>> +        PowerPCCPU *cpu = POWERPC_CPU(cs);
>>>> +        DeviceClass *dc = DEVICE_GET_CLASS(cpu);
>>>> +        int smpt = spapr_get_compat_smp_threads(cpu);
>>>> +        int i, index = ppc_get_vcpu_dt_id(cpu);
>>>> +        uint32_t servers_prop[smpt];
>>>> +        uint32_t gservers_prop[smpt * 2];
>>>> +        char tmp[32];
>>>> +
>>>> +        if ((index % smt) != 0) {
>>>> +            continue;
>>>> +        }
>>>> +
>>>> +        snprintf(tmp, 32, "address@hidden", dc->fw_name, index);
>>>> +        trace_spapr_cas_add_subnode(tmp);
>>>> +
>>>> +        _FDT((fdt_begin_node(fdt, tmp)));
>>>> +        _FDT((fdt_property_cell(fdt, "cpu-version", cpu->cpu_version)));
>>>> +
>>>> +        /* Build interrupt servers and gservers properties */
>>>> +        for (i = 0; i < smpt; i++) {
>>>> +            servers_prop[i] = cpu_to_be32(index + i);
>>>> +            /* Hack, direct the group queues back to cpu 0 */
>>>> +            gservers_prop[i*2] = cpu_to_be32(index + i);
>>>> +            gservers_prop[i*2 + 1] = 0;
>>>> +        }
>>>> +        _FDT((fdt_property(fdt, "ibm,ppc-interrupt-server#s",
>>>> +                           servers_prop, sizeof(servers_prop))));
>>>> +        _FDT((fdt_property(fdt, "ibm,ppc-interrupt-gserver#s",
>>>> +                           gservers_prop, sizeof(gservers_prop))));
>>>> +
>>>> +        _FDT((fdt_end_node(fdt)));
>>>> +    }
>>>> +
>>>> +    _FDT((fdt_end_node(fdt)));
>>> Why is this so much code? Can we only replace full nodes?
>> It is a diff tree, in only has properties to change.
> 
> So why do we change so much then? :)


3 (three) properties are "much" now? :)

>>> Then please
>>> extract the original CPU node creation into a function and just call it
>>> from the original generation and from here.
>>>
>>> If we can also replace single properties I'd say we only need to override
>>> cpu-version.
>>
>> Mmm. The user could run qemu with threads=8 on POWER8 with SLES11 which
>> must not see 8 threads but it can update itself and reboot with the kernel
>> which is aware of POWER8. You are saying we do not want to support that?
> 
> First off, I think that practically speaking people will want to use
> 2-thread granularity on POWER8 because that gives them the best load
> exploitation on the system.

Practically speaking, people will want to use kernels which can work on
POWER8 in raw mode, no? Here we are trying to fix older guests.

> So if we just disable CPU nodes that would not be visible usually (there
> was a disabled flag in cpu nodes, right?) for threads that are incompatible
> with a new CAS mode, we can then remove the disabled flag when the guest
> accepts more threads again.
> 
> That means we could expose 8 threads (POWER8), guest only supports 2
> threads (POWER6), so we waste 6 threads. But the remaining 2 will be fast
> ;). We basically degrade the system to SMT2 mode.

We do not want to show more threads (i.e. bigger ibm,ppc-interrupt-server#s
properties) if we do not support more threads as we do not really know what
guest kernel (including AIX) or some ppc64_cpu/drmgr/whatever tool will do
if they find more.

> What does pHyp do here?

I wish it was easy to verify :)

I fail to see what exactly your objections are all about, I definitely miss
something big here. Is it a minor code duplication or some dangerous bug?
If it is just a code duplication, I could do something about it.


-- 
Alexey