On 7/31/20 12:09 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 30/07/20 18:33, Claudio Fontana wrote:
>> One problem I noticed is that qemu_clock_get_ns is util/qemu-timer.c,
>> which is tools _and_ softmmu, while I tried to extract the
>> softmmu-only timer code in softmmu/cpu-timers.c,
>
> Not all of it, only t
On 30/07/20 18:33, Claudio Fontana wrote:
> One problem I noticed is that qemu_clock_get_ns is util/qemu-timer.c,
> which is tools _and_ softmmu, while I tried to extract the
> softmmu-only timer code in softmmu/cpu-timers.c,
Not all of it, only the VIRTUAL clock which is
if (use_icount)
On 7/29/20 12:01 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 29/07/20 10:48, Claudio Fontana wrote:
>>> If you want you can add to your accelerator ops series one for
>>> qemu_get_clock_ns(QEMU_CLOCK_VIRTUAL), cpu_get_ticks() and
>>> qemu_start_warp_timer(), that would certainly work for me;
>>
>> The problem I
On 29/07/20 10:48, Claudio Fontana wrote:
>> If you want you can add to your accelerator ops series one for
>> qemu_get_clock_ns(QEMU_CLOCK_VIRTUAL), cpu_get_ticks() and
>> qemu_start_warp_timer(), that would certainly work for me;
>
> The problem I see here is, as usual, one of meaning.
>
> Are
Hi Paolo,
now that things exposed by my patch are fixed, back on this topic :-)
On 7/11/20 2:19 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 11/07/20 13:49, Claudio Fontana wrote:
>>> Apart from the name, icount is more like deterministic execution than
>>
>> Maybe we should start choosing names more carefully
On 7/13/20 12:51 PM, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> On Sat, 11 Jul 2020 13:40:50 +0200
> Claudio Fontana wrote:
>
>> I found out something that for me shows that more investigation here is
>> warranted.
>>
>>
>> Here is my latest workaround for the problem:
>>
>>
>>
>> diff --git a/hw/s390x/s390-skeys.c
On Sat, 11 Jul 2020 13:40:50 +0200
Claudio Fontana wrote:
> I found out something that for me shows that more investigation here is
> warranted.
>
>
> Here is my latest workaround for the problem:
>
>
>
> diff --git a/hw/s390x/s390-skeys.c b/hw/s390x/s390-skeys.c
> index 1e036cc602..47c9a01
On Fri, 10 Jul 2020 21:20:08 +0200
Claudio Fontana wrote:
> >>> In short this goes away if I again set icount to enabled for qtest,
> >>> basically ensuring that --enable-tcg is there and then reenabling icount.
> >>>
> >>> qtest was forcing icount and shift=0 by creating qemu options, in order
On 7/11/20 2:19 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 11/07/20 13:49, Claudio Fontana wrote:
>>> Apart from the name, icount is more like deterministic execution than
>>
>> Maybe we should start choosing names more carefully in a way to express what
>> we mean?
>
> I don't disagree. For icount in partic
On 11/07/20 13:49, Claudio Fontana wrote:
>> Apart from the name, icount is more like deterministic execution than
>
> Maybe we should start choosing names more carefully in a way to express what
> we mean?
I don't disagree. For icount in particular however we're about 12 years
too late.
>> q
On 7/11/20 11:39 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 11/07/20 11:14, Claudio Fontana wrote:
>> On 7/11/20 12:45 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>>> On 10/07/20 06:36, Thomas Huth wrote:
In short this goes away if I again set icount to enabled for qtest,
basically ensuring that --enable-tcg is the
On 7/10/20 8:33 AM, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> On Thu, 9 Jul 2020 20:46:56 +0200
> Claudio Fontana wrote:
>
>> On 7/9/20 8:38 PM, Claudio Fontana wrote:
>>> On 7/8/20 5:05 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
On 08/07/20 17:00, Claudio Fontana wrote:
>> Bisectable, 100% failure rate, etc. :( Can yo
On 11/07/20 11:14, Claudio Fontana wrote:
> On 7/11/20 12:45 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> On 10/07/20 06:36, Thomas Huth wrote:
>>>
>>> In short this goes away if I again set icount to enabled for qtest,
>>> basically ensuring that --enable-tcg is there and then reenabling icount.
>>>
>>> qtest was
On 7/11/20 12:45 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 10/07/20 06:36, Thomas Huth wrote:
>>
>> In short this goes away if I again set icount to enabled for qtest,
>> basically ensuring that --enable-tcg is there and then reenabling icount.
>>
>> qtest was forcing icount and shift=0 by creating qemu option
On 10/07/20 06:36, Thomas Huth wrote:
>
> In short this goes away if I again set icount to enabled for qtest,
> basically ensuring that --enable-tcg is there and then reenabling icount.
>
> qtest was forcing icount and shift=0 by creating qemu options, in order to
> misuse its counter feature,
>
On 7/10/20 8:33 AM, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> On Thu, 9 Jul 2020 20:46:56 +0200
> Claudio Fontana wrote:
>
>> On 7/9/20 8:38 PM, Claudio Fontana wrote:
>>> On 7/8/20 5:05 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
On 08/07/20 17:00, Claudio Fontana wrote:
>> Bisectable, 100% failure rate, etc. :( Can yo
On Thu, 9 Jul 2020 20:46:56 +0200
Claudio Fontana wrote:
> On 7/9/20 8:38 PM, Claudio Fontana wrote:
> > On 7/8/20 5:05 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> >> On 08/07/20 17:00, Claudio Fontana wrote:
> Bisectable, 100% failure rate, etc. :( Can you split the patch in
> multiple parts, spec
On 09/07/2020 20.38, Claudio Fontana wrote:
> On 7/8/20 5:05 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> On 08/07/20 17:00, Claudio Fontana wrote:
Bisectable, 100% failure rate, etc. :( Can you split the patch in
multiple parts, specifically separating any rename or introducing of
includes from the
On 7/9/20 8:38 PM, Claudio Fontana wrote:
> On 7/8/20 5:05 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> On 08/07/20 17:00, Claudio Fontana wrote:
Bisectable, 100% failure rate, etc. :( Can you split the patch in
multiple parts, specifically separating any rename or introducing of
includes from the f
On 7/8/20 5:05 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 08/07/20 17:00, Claudio Fontana wrote:
>>> Bisectable, 100% failure rate, etc. :( Can you split the patch in
>>> multiple parts, specifically separating any rename or introducing of
>>> includes from the final file move?
>> Hi Paolo,
>>
>> will take a l
On 08/07/20 17:17, Claudio Fontana wrote:
> On 7/8/20 5:05 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> On 08/07/20 17:00, Claudio Fontana wrote:
Bisectable, 100% failure rate, etc. :( Can you split the patch in
multiple parts, specifically separating any rename or introducing of
includes from the f
On 08/07/20 17:07, Thomas Huth wrote:
>> Nope, unfortunately we don't have an s390 CI. But if you can get your
>> hands on one, just "./configure --target-list=s390x-softmmu && make &&
>> make check-block" will show it.
>
> We've got a s390x builder on Travis ... or is this only about the s390x
>
On 08/07/2020 17.05, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 08/07/20 17:00, Claudio Fontana wrote:
>>> Bisectable, 100% failure rate, etc. :( Can you split the patch in
>>> multiple parts, specifically separating any rename or introducing of
>>> includes from the final file move?
>> Hi Paolo,
>>
>> will take a
On 08/07/2020 17.12, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 08/07/20 17:07, Thomas Huth wrote:
>>> Nope, unfortunately we don't have an s390 CI. But if you can get your
>>> hands on one, just "./configure --target-list=s390x-softmmu && make &&
>>> make check-block" will show it.
>>
>> We've got a s390x builder
On 08/07/20 17:00, Claudio Fontana wrote:
>> Bisectable, 100% failure rate, etc. :( Can you split the patch in
>> multiple parts, specifically separating any rename or introducing of
>> includes from the final file move?
> Hi Paolo,
>
> will take a look!
>
> Is this captured by some travis / cir
On 29/06/20 11:35, Claudio Fontana wrote:
> refactoring of cpus.c continues with cpu timer state extraction.
>
> cpu-timers: responsible for the cpu timers state, and for access to
> cpu clocks and ticks.
>
> icount: counts the TCG instructions executed. As such it is specific to
> the TCG accele
On 7/8/20 5:23 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 08/07/20 17:17, Claudio Fontana wrote:
>> On 7/8/20 5:05 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>>> On 08/07/20 17:00, Claudio Fontana wrote:
> Bisectable, 100% failure rate, etc. :( Can you split the patch in
> multiple parts, specifically separating any ren
On 7/8/20 5:05 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 08/07/20 17:00, Claudio Fontana wrote:
>>> Bisectable, 100% failure rate, etc. :( Can you split the patch in
>>> multiple parts, specifically separating any rename or introducing of
>>> includes from the final file move?
>> Hi Paolo,
>>
>> will take a l
On 7/8/20 5:12 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 08/07/20 17:07, Thomas Huth wrote:
>>> Nope, unfortunately we don't have an s390 CI. But if you can get your
>>> hands on one, just "./configure --target-list=s390x-softmmu && make &&
>>> make check-block" will show it.
>>
>> We've got a s390x builder o
On 7/8/20 4:34 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 29/06/20 11:35, Claudio Fontana wrote:
>> refactoring of cpus.c continues with cpu timer state extraction.
>>
>> cpu-timers: responsible for the cpu timers state, and for access to
>> cpu clocks and ticks.
>>
>> icount: counts the TCG instructions execut
refactoring of cpus.c continues with cpu timer state extraction.
cpu-timers: responsible for the cpu timers state, and for access to
cpu clocks and ticks.
icount: counts the TCG instructions executed. As such it is specific to
the TCG accelerator. Therefore, it is built only under CONFIG_TCG.
On
31 matches
Mail list logo
