On Fri, 5 Apr 2019 16:04:27 +1100 Alexey Kardashevskiy <a...@linux.ibm.com> wrote:
> On 05/04/2019 10:17, David Gibson wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 04, 2019 at 02:40:45PM +0530, Aravinda Prasad wrote: > >> > >> > >> On Monday 25 March 2019 11:52 AM, David Gibson wrote: > >>> On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 12:03:58PM +0530, Aravinda Prasad wrote: > >>>> Memory error such as bit flips that cannot be corrected > >>>> by hardware are passed on to the kernel for handling. > >>>> If the memory address in error belongs to guest then > >>>> the guest kernel is responsible for taking suitable action. > >>>> Patch [1] enhances KVM to exit guest with exit reason > >>>> set to KVM_EXIT_NMI in such cases. This patch handles > >>>> KVM_EXIT_NMI exit. > >>>> > >>>> [1] https://www.spinics.net/lists/kvm-ppc/msg12637.html > >>>> (e20bbd3d and related commits) > >>>> > >>>> Signed-off-by: Aravinda Prasad <aravi...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > >>>> --- > >>>> hw/ppc/spapr_events.c | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++++ > >>>> include/hw/ppc/spapr.h | 1 + > >>>> target/ppc/kvm.c | 16 ++++++++++++++++ > >>>> target/ppc/kvm_ppc.h | 2 ++ > >>>> 4 files changed, 41 insertions(+) > >>>> > >> > >> [...] > >> > >>>> diff --git a/target/ppc/kvm.c b/target/ppc/kvm.c > >>>> index 2427c8e..a593448 100644 > >>>> --- a/target/ppc/kvm.c > >>>> +++ b/target/ppc/kvm.c > >>>> @@ -1738,6 +1738,11 @@ int kvm_arch_handle_exit(CPUState *cs, struct > >>>> kvm_run *run) > >>>> ret = 0; > >>>> break; > >>>> > >>>> + case KVM_EXIT_NMI: > >>>> + DPRINTF("handle NMI exception\n"); > >>> > >>> tracepoints are generally preferred to new DPRINTFs. > >> > >> I see DPRINTFs used in all other exit reasons in this function. Do you > >> want me to change this particular exit case to tracepoints? I think it > >> is better to keep this DPRINTF as of now and change all the DPRINTFs to > >> tracepoints in a separate patch set. > > > > Ah, good point. > > imho not. The kvm.c already knows about traces (there are two) and even > if every other trace in kvm_arch_handle_exit() is DPRINTF (enabled all > at once), having at least one which can be enabled without QEMU > recompile and separately from the others is a small but nice bonus > before someone gets rid of DPRINTF. > Done. https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/qemu-devel/list/?series=101141 > > > Tracepoints are generally preferred, but since > > DPRINTFs are in use here, stick with that (at some point it would be > > good to change the whole file, but that's out of scope here). > >
