Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v5 2/4] spapr: Implement H_PROD
Cédric Le Goater's on July 17, 2019 11:33 pm:
> On 17/07/2019 07:39, Nicholas Piggin wrote:
>> H_PROD is added, and H_CEDE is modified to test the prod bit
>> according to PAPR.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Nicholas Piggin
>> ---
>> hw/ppc/spapr_hcall.c | 29 +
>> 1 file changed, 29 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/hw/ppc/spapr_hcall.c b/hw/ppc/spapr_hcall.c
>> index e615881ac4..8b208ab259 100644
>> --- a/hw/ppc/spapr_hcall.c
>> +++ b/hw/ppc/spapr_hcall.c
>> @@ -1050,14 +1050,41 @@ static target_ulong h_cede(PowerPCCPU *cpu,
>> SpaprMachineState *spapr,
>> {
>> CPUPPCState *env = >env;
>> CPUState *cs = CPU(cpu);
>> +SpaprCpuState *spapr_cpu = spapr_cpu_state(cpu);
>>
>> env->msr |= (1ULL << MSR_EE);
>> hreg_compute_hflags(env);
>> +
>> +if (spapr_cpu->prod) {
>> +spapr_cpu->prod = false;
>> +return H_SUCCESS;
>> +}
>> +
>> if (!cpu_has_work(cs)) {
>> cs->halted = 1;
>> cs->exception_index = EXCP_HLT;
>
> Shouldn't that be EXCP_HALTED instead ?
Possibly, I'm not sure. I don't know if it even makes a difference in
ppc code?
Thanks,
Nick
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v5 2/4] spapr: Implement H_PROD
On 17/07/2019 07:39, Nicholas Piggin wrote:
> H_PROD is added, and H_CEDE is modified to test the prod bit
> according to PAPR.
>
> Signed-off-by: Nicholas Piggin
> ---
> hw/ppc/spapr_hcall.c | 29 +
> 1 file changed, 29 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/hw/ppc/spapr_hcall.c b/hw/ppc/spapr_hcall.c
> index e615881ac4..8b208ab259 100644
> --- a/hw/ppc/spapr_hcall.c
> +++ b/hw/ppc/spapr_hcall.c
> @@ -1050,14 +1050,41 @@ static target_ulong h_cede(PowerPCCPU *cpu,
> SpaprMachineState *spapr,
> {
> CPUPPCState *env = >env;
> CPUState *cs = CPU(cpu);
> +SpaprCpuState *spapr_cpu = spapr_cpu_state(cpu);
>
> env->msr |= (1ULL << MSR_EE);
> hreg_compute_hflags(env);
> +
> +if (spapr_cpu->prod) {
> +spapr_cpu->prod = false;
> +return H_SUCCESS;
> +}
> +
> if (!cpu_has_work(cs)) {
> cs->halted = 1;
> cs->exception_index = EXCP_HLT;
Shouldn't that be EXCP_HALTED instead ?
commit 1dd088946cf4 seems to say that h_cede is equivalent to the hlt
instruction on x86 but in 7 years things have changed.
C.
> cs->exit_request = 1;
> }
> +
> +return H_SUCCESS;
> +}
> +
> +static target_ulong h_prod(PowerPCCPU *cpu, SpaprMachineState *spapr,
> + target_ulong opcode, target_ulong *args)
> +{
> +target_long target = args[0];
> +CPUState *cs;
> +SpaprCpuState *spapr_cpu = spapr_cpu_state(cpu);
> +
> +cs = CPU(spapr_find_cpu(target));
> +if (!cs) {
> +return H_PARAMETER;
> +}
> +
> +spapr_cpu->prod = true;
> +cs->halted = 0;
> +qemu_cpu_kick(cs);
> +
> return H_SUCCESS;
> }
>
> @@ -1882,6 +1909,8 @@ static void hypercall_register_types(void)
> /* hcall-splpar */
> spapr_register_hypercall(H_REGISTER_VPA, h_register_vpa);
> spapr_register_hypercall(H_CEDE, h_cede);
> +spapr_register_hypercall(H_PROD, h_prod);
> +
> spapr_register_hypercall(H_SIGNAL_SYS_RESET, h_signal_sys_reset);
>
> /* processor register resource access h-calls */
>
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v5 2/4] spapr: Implement H_PROD
Cédric Le Goater's on July 17, 2019 8:16 pm:
> On 17/07/2019 07:39, Nicholas Piggin wrote:
>> H_PROD is added, and H_CEDE is modified to test the prod bit
>> according to PAPR.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Nicholas Piggin
>> ---
>> hw/ppc/spapr_hcall.c | 29 +
>> 1 file changed, 29 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/hw/ppc/spapr_hcall.c b/hw/ppc/spapr_hcall.c
>> index e615881ac4..8b208ab259 100644
>> --- a/hw/ppc/spapr_hcall.c
>> +++ b/hw/ppc/spapr_hcall.c
>> @@ -1050,14 +1050,41 @@ static target_ulong h_cede(PowerPCCPU *cpu,
>> SpaprMachineState *spapr,
>> {
>> CPUPPCState *env = >env;
>> CPUState *cs = CPU(cpu);
>> +SpaprCpuState *spapr_cpu = spapr_cpu_state(cpu);
>>
>> env->msr |= (1ULL << MSR_EE);
>> hreg_compute_hflags(env);
>> +
>> +if (spapr_cpu->prod) {
>> +spapr_cpu->prod = false;
>> +return H_SUCCESS;
>> +}
>> +
>> if (!cpu_has_work(cs)) {
>> cs->halted = 1;
>> cs->exception_index = EXCP_HLT;
>> cs->exit_request = 1;
>> }
>> +
>> +return H_SUCCESS;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static target_ulong h_prod(PowerPCCPU *cpu, SpaprMachineState *spapr,
>> + target_ulong opcode, target_ulong *args)
>> +{
>> +target_long target = args[0];
>> +CPUState *cs;
>> +SpaprCpuState *spapr_cpu = spapr_cpu_state(cpu);
>
> shouldn't we grab the SpaprCpuState of 'target' instead ?
Yes we should, good catch.
Thanks,
Nick
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v5 2/4] spapr: Implement H_PROD
On 17/07/2019 07:39, Nicholas Piggin wrote:
> H_PROD is added, and H_CEDE is modified to test the prod bit
> according to PAPR.
>
> Signed-off-by: Nicholas Piggin
> ---
> hw/ppc/spapr_hcall.c | 29 +
> 1 file changed, 29 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/hw/ppc/spapr_hcall.c b/hw/ppc/spapr_hcall.c
> index e615881ac4..8b208ab259 100644
> --- a/hw/ppc/spapr_hcall.c
> +++ b/hw/ppc/spapr_hcall.c
> @@ -1050,14 +1050,41 @@ static target_ulong h_cede(PowerPCCPU *cpu,
> SpaprMachineState *spapr,
> {
> CPUPPCState *env = >env;
> CPUState *cs = CPU(cpu);
> +SpaprCpuState *spapr_cpu = spapr_cpu_state(cpu);
>
> env->msr |= (1ULL << MSR_EE);
> hreg_compute_hflags(env);
> +
> +if (spapr_cpu->prod) {
> +spapr_cpu->prod = false;
> +return H_SUCCESS;
> +}
> +
> if (!cpu_has_work(cs)) {
> cs->halted = 1;
> cs->exception_index = EXCP_HLT;
> cs->exit_request = 1;
> }
> +
> +return H_SUCCESS;
> +}
> +
> +static target_ulong h_prod(PowerPCCPU *cpu, SpaprMachineState *spapr,
> + target_ulong opcode, target_ulong *args)
> +{
> +target_long target = args[0];
> +CPUState *cs;
> +SpaprCpuState *spapr_cpu = spapr_cpu_state(cpu);
shouldn't we grab the SpaprCpuState of 'target' instead ?
> +cs = CPU(spapr_find_cpu(target));
> +if (!cs) {
> +return H_PARAMETER;
> +}
> +
> +spapr_cpu->prod = true;
> +cs->halted = 0;
> +qemu_cpu_kick(cs);
> +
> return H_SUCCESS;
> }
>
> @@ -1882,6 +1909,8 @@ static void hypercall_register_types(void)
> /* hcall-splpar */
> spapr_register_hypercall(H_REGISTER_VPA, h_register_vpa);
> spapr_register_hypercall(H_CEDE, h_cede);
> +spapr_register_hypercall(H_PROD, h_prod);
> +
> spapr_register_hypercall(H_SIGNAL_SYS_RESET, h_signal_sys_reset);
>
> /* processor register resource access h-calls */
>
