qemu-ppc
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-ppc] [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 16/17] s390x: initialize memory re


From: Murilo Opsfelder Araujo
Subject: Re: [Qemu-ppc] [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 16/17] s390x: initialize memory region for memory devices
Date: Fri, 11 May 2018 15:34:05 -0300
User-agent: Mutt/1.9.2 (2017-12-15)

On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 03:19:52PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> While s390x has no real interface for communicating devices mapped into
> the physical address space of the guest, paravirtualized devices can
> easily expose the applicable address range themselves.
> 
> So let's use the difference between maxram_size and ram_size as the size
> for our hotplug memory area (just as on other architectures).
> 
> Signed-off-by: David Hildenbrand <address@hidden>
> ---
>  hw/s390x/s390-virtio-ccw.c | 28 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
>  1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/hw/s390x/s390-virtio-ccw.c b/hw/s390x/s390-virtio-ccw.c
> index ee0a2b124f..09b755282b 100644
> --- a/hw/s390x/s390-virtio-ccw.c
> +++ b/hw/s390x/s390-virtio-ccw.c
> @@ -157,9 +157,11 @@ static void virtio_ccw_register_hcalls(void)
>  #define KVM_MEM_MAX_NR_PAGES ((1ULL << 31) - 1)
>  #define SEG_MSK (~0xfffffULL)
>  #define KVM_SLOT_MAX_BYTES ((KVM_MEM_MAX_NR_PAGES * TARGET_PAGE_SIZE) & 
> SEG_MSK)
> -static void s390_memory_init(ram_addr_t mem_size)
> +static void s390_memory_init(MachineState *machine)
>  {
> +    S390CcwMachineState *ms = S390_CCW_MACHINE(machine);
>      MemoryRegion *sysmem = get_system_memory();
> +    ram_addr_t mem_size = machine->ram_size;
>      ram_addr_t chunk, offset = 0;
>      unsigned int number = 0;
>      gchar *name;
> @@ -181,6 +183,28 @@ static void s390_memory_init(ram_addr_t mem_size)
>      }
>      g_free(name);
>  
> +    /* always allocate the device memory information */
> +    machine->device_memory = g_malloc0(sizeof(*machine->device_memory));

Is there any QEMU guideline/preference/recommendation in using g_new0
vs. g_malloc0?

I recall Paolo suggesting g_new0 instead of g_malloc0 in another patch:

  http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2018-05/msg02372.html

> +
> +    /* initialize device memory address space */
> +    if (machine->ram_size < machine->maxram_size) {
> +        ram_addr_t device_mem_size = machine->maxram_size - 
> machine->ram_size;
> +
> +        if (QEMU_ALIGN_UP(machine->maxram_size, TARGET_PAGE_SIZE) !=
> +            machine->maxram_size) {
> +            error_report("maximum memory size must be aligned to multiple of 
> "
> +                         "%d bytes", TARGET_PAGE_SIZE);
> +            exit(EXIT_FAILURE);
> +        }
> +
> +        machine->device_memory->base = machine->ram_size;
> +        memory_region_init(&machine->device_memory->mr, OBJECT(ms),
> +                           "device-memory", device_mem_size);
> +        memory_region_add_subregion(sysmem, machine->device_memory->base,
> +                                    &machine->device_memory->mr);
> +
> +    }
> +
>      /* Initialize storage key device */
>      s390_skeys_init();
>      /* Initialize storage attributes device */
> @@ -304,7 +328,7 @@ static void ccw_init(MachineState *machine)
>      DeviceState *dev;
>  
>      s390_sclp_init();
> -    s390_memory_init(machine->ram_size);
> +    s390_memory_init(machine);
>  
>      /* init CPUs (incl. CPU model) early so s390_has_feature() works */
>      s390_init_cpus(machine);
> -- 
> 2.14.3
> 
> 

-- 
Murilo




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]