On 28/3/24 16:39, Thomas Huth wrote:
On 28/03/2024 16.12, Mark Cave-Ayland wrote:
On 27/03/2024 16:54, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:

Per Daniel suggestion [*]:

  > isapc could arguably be restricted to just 32-bit CPU models,
  > because we should not need it to support any feature that didn't
  > exist prior to circa 1995. eg refuse to start with isapc, if 'lm'
  > is present in the CPU model for example.

Display a warning when such CPU is used:

   $ qemu-system-x86_64 -monitor stdio -S -M isapc -cpu Westmere
   qemu-system-x86_64: warning: Use of 64-bit CPU 'Westmere' is deprecated on the ISA-only PC machine
   QEMU 8.2.91 monitor - type 'help' for more information
   (qemu) q

   $ qemu-system-x86_64 -monitor stdio -S -M isapc -cpu athlon
   QEMU 8.2.91 monitor - type 'help' for more information
   (qemu) q

[*] https://lore.kernel.org/qemu-devel/zgqks4rpmst5x...@redhat.com/

Suggested-by: Daniel P. Berrangé <berra...@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <phi...@linaro.org>
---
  docs/about/deprecated.rst |  7 +++++++
  include/hw/i386/pc.h      |  1 +
  hw/i386/pc_piix.c         | 14 ++++++++++++++
  3 files changed, 22 insertions(+)

diff --git a/docs/about/deprecated.rst b/docs/about/deprecated.rst
index 7b548519b5..345c35507f 100644
--- a/docs/about/deprecated.rst
+++ b/docs/about/deprecated.rst
@@ -208,6 +208,13 @@ is no longer packaged in any distro making it harder to run the
  ``check-tcg`` tests. Unless we can improve the testing situation there
  is a chance the code will bitrot without anyone noticing.
+64-bit (x86_64) CPUs on the ``isapc`` machine (since 9.0)
+'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''
+
+The ``isapc`` machine aims to emulate old PC machine without PCI was
+generalized, so hardware available around 1995, before 64-bit intel
+CPUs were produced.
+
  System emulator machines
  ------------------------
diff --git a/include/hw/i386/pc.h b/include/hw/i386/pc.h
index 27a68071d7..2d202b9549 100644
--- a/include/hw/i386/pc.h
+++ b/include/hw/i386/pc.h
@@ -96,6 +96,7 @@ struct PCMachineClass {
      const char *default_south_bridge;
      /* Compat options: */
+    bool deprecate_64bit_cpu; /* Specific to the 'isapc' machine */
      /* Default CPU model version.  See x86_cpu_set_default_version(). */
      int default_cpu_version;
diff --git a/hw/i386/pc_piix.c b/hw/i386/pc_piix.c
index 18ba076609..2e5b2efc33 100644
--- a/hw/i386/pc_piix.c
+++ b/hw/i386/pc_piix.c
@@ -182,7 +182,20 @@ static void pc_init1(MachineState *machine, const char *pci_type)
      }
      pc_machine_init_sgx_epc(pcms);
+
      x86_cpus_init(x86ms, pcmc->default_cpu_version);
+    if (pcmc->deprecate_64bit_cpu) {
+        X86CPU *cpu = X86_CPU(first_cpu);
+
+        if (cpu->env.features[FEAT_8000_0001_EDX] & CPUID_EXT2_LM) {
+            const char *cpu_type = object_get_typename(OBJECT(first_cpu)); +            int cpu_len = strlen(cpu_type) - strlen(X86_CPU_TYPE_SUFFIX);
+
+            warn_report("Use of 64-bit CPU '%.*s' is deprecated"
+                        " on the ISA-only PC machine",
+                        cpu_len, cpu_type);
+        }
+    }
      if (kvm_enabled()) {
          kvmclock_create(pcmc->kvmclock_create_always);
@@ -918,6 +931,7 @@ static void isapc_machine_options(MachineClass *m)
      pcmc->gigabyte_align = false;
      pcmc->smbios_legacy_mode = true;
      pcmc->has_reserved_memory = false;
+    pcmc->deprecate_64bit_cpu = true;
      m->default_nic = "ne2k_isa";
      m->default_cpu_type = X86_CPU_TYPE_NAME("486");
      m->no_parallel = !module_object_class_by_name(TYPE_ISA_PARALLEL);

The logic around checking CPUID_EXT2_LM looks good to me. Slightly curious as to whether people feel updating PCMachineClass is necessary, or you can simply do qdev_get_machine() and use object_dynamic_cast() to see if the machine matches MACHINE_NAME("isapc") and warn that way?

Why don't you simply pass it as a parameter from pc_init_isa() instead? Or do the whole check in pc_init_isa() instead?

Because the CPU isn't instantiated so we can't check the CPUID_EXT2_LM
feature :/


Reply via email to