[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Qemu-ppc] [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH] powerpc: add PVR mask support
From: |
Andreas Färber |
Subject: |
Re: [Qemu-ppc] [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH] powerpc: add PVR mask support |
Date: |
Thu, 15 Aug 2013 18:22:26 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130620 Thunderbird/17.0.7 |
Am 15.08.2013 17:58, schrieb Alexander Graf:
>
> On 15.08.2013, at 17:48, Andreas Färber wrote:
>
>> Am 15.08.2013 17:30, schrieb Alexander Graf:
>>>
>>> On 15.08.2013, at 17:11, Andreas Färber wrote:
>>>
>>>> Am 15.08.2013 15:12, schrieb Anthony Liguori:
>>>>> Everyone is talking past each other and no one is addressing the real
>>>>> problem. There are two distinct issues here:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1) We have two ABIs that cannot be changed unless there's a very good
>>>>> reason to. Alexey's original patch breaks both. The guest ABI
>>>>> cannot change given a fixed command line.
>>>>>
>>>>> IOW, the exposed PVR value for -cpu POWER7 cannot change across
>>>>> versions of QEMU or when running on different hardware. This breaks
>>>>> live migration and save/resume.
>>>>>
>>>>> We also cannot break the command line interface. If the last version
>>>>> of QEMU supported -cpu POWER7_v2.1, then we must continue to support
>>>>> that.
>>>>
>>>> 1a) How should -cpu 0xDEADBEEF or -cpu DEADBEEF behave.
>>>>
>>>> I expect it to error out as before
>>>> rather than applying the same fuzz/mask that -cpu host might.
>>>
>>> I actually think it'd make sense to apply the same fuzz/mask, don't you
>>> think?
>>
>> I think "-cpu host" has the semantics of give-me-what-the-host-has. But
>> -cpu 0xDEADBEEF is asking for PVR DEADBEEF and having it silently return
>> a guest-visible DEADBEBE is going to be undesired.
>
> -cpu host on 0xDEADBEEF should give us a 0xDEADBEEF cpu. -cpu 0xDEADBEEF
> should give us a 0xDEADBEEF cpu :).
Then we mustn't tweak translate_init.c:cpu_class_by_pvr() to return
deviating results! Which is what the change to
ppc_cpu_compare_class_pvr() is essentially resulting in if I am not
completely off track. And therefore my calling to handle this at a
higher level (KVM init), where the user's intentions are clear, rather
than to blur our internal API. Otherwise the _by_pvr() function would
need to create a new class or modify an existing one when the function
can't know what the function call was actually intended for.
Andreas
--
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer; HRB 16746 AG Nürnberg
- Re: [Qemu-ppc] [RFC PATCH] powerpc: add PVR mask support, (continued)
- Re: [Qemu-ppc] [RFC PATCH] powerpc: add PVR mask support, Alexey Kardashevskiy, 2013/08/15
- Re: [Qemu-ppc] [RFC PATCH] powerpc: add PVR mask support, Alexander Graf, 2013/08/15
- Re: [Qemu-ppc] [RFC PATCH] powerpc: add PVR mask support, Benjamin Herrenschmidt, 2013/08/15
- Re: [Qemu-ppc] [RFC PATCH] powerpc: add PVR mask support, Alexander Graf, 2013/08/15
- Re: [Qemu-ppc] [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH] powerpc: add PVR mask support, Anthony Liguori, 2013/08/15
- Re: [Qemu-ppc] [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH] powerpc: add PVR mask support, Alexander Graf, 2013/08/15
- Re: [Qemu-ppc] [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH] powerpc: add PVR mask support, Andreas Färber, 2013/08/15
- Re: [Qemu-ppc] [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH] powerpc: add PVR mask support, Alexander Graf, 2013/08/15
- Re: [Qemu-ppc] [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH] powerpc: add PVR mask support, Andreas Färber, 2013/08/15
- Re: [Qemu-ppc] [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH] powerpc: add PVR mask support, Alexander Graf, 2013/08/15
- Re: [Qemu-ppc] [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH] powerpc: add PVR mask support,
Andreas Färber <=
- Re: [Qemu-ppc] [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH] powerpc: add PVR mask support, Alexander Graf, 2013/08/15
- Re: [Qemu-ppc] [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH] powerpc: add PVR mask support, Anthony Liguori, 2013/08/15
Re: [Qemu-ppc] [RFC PATCH] powerpc: add PVR mask support, Benjamin Herrenschmidt, 2013/08/15
Re: [Qemu-ppc] [RFC PATCH] powerpc: add PVR mask support, Alexander Graf, 2013/08/15