[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v6 2/4] target-s390x: Migrate to new NMI interfa
From: |
Alexey Kardashevskiy |
Subject: |
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v6 2/4] target-s390x: Migrate to new NMI interface |
Date: |
Thu, 12 Jun 2014 10:08:52 +1000 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686 on x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.5.0 |
On 06/12/2014 03:29 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 11/06/2014 19:03, Alexey Kardashevskiy ha scritto:
>> This implements an NMI interface for s390 machine.
>>
>> This removes #ifdef s390 branch in qmp_inject_nmi so new s390's
>> nmi_monitor_handler() callback is going to be used for NMI.
>>
>> Since nmi_monitor_handler()-calling code is platform independent,
>> CPUState::cpu_index is used instead of S390CPU::env.cpu_num.
>> There should not be any change in behaviour as both @cpu_index and
>> @cpu_num are global CPU numbers.
>>
>> Also, s390_cpu_restart() takes care of preforming operations in
>> the specific CPU thread so no extra measure is required here either.
>>
>> Since the only error s390_cpu_restart() can return is ENOSYS, convert
>> it to QERR_UNSUPPORTED.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Alexey Kardashevskiy <address@hidden>
>> ---
>> Changes:
>> v6:
>> * supported NMI interface
>>
>> v5:
>> * added ENOSYS -> QERR_UNSUPPORTED, qapi/qmp/qerror.h was added for this
>>
>> v4:
>> * s/\<nmi\>/nmi_monitor_handler/
>>
>> v3:
>> * now contains both old code removal and new code insertion, easier to
>> track changes
>>
>> ---
>> Is there any good reason to have @cpu_num in addition to @cpu_index?
>> Just asking :)
>> ---
>> cpus.c | 14 --------------
>> hw/s390x/s390-virtio.c | 31 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> target-s390x/cpu.c | 1 +
>> 3 files changed, 32 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/cpus.c b/cpus.c
>> index da1f6a9..f3756b4 100644
>> --- a/cpus.c
>> +++ b/cpus.c
>> @@ -1481,20 +1481,6 @@ void qmp_inject_nmi(Error **errp)
>> apic_deliver_nmi(cpu->apic_state);
>> }
>> }
>> -#elif defined(TARGET_S390X)
>> - CPUState *cs;
>> - S390CPU *cpu;
>> -
>> - CPU_FOREACH(cs) {
>> - cpu = S390_CPU(cs);
>> - if (cpu->env.cpu_num == monitor_get_cpu_index()) {
>> - if (s390_cpu_restart(S390_CPU(cs)) == -1) {
>> - error_set(errp, QERR_UNSUPPORTED);
>> - return;
>> - }
>> - break;
>> - }
>> - }
>> #else
>> nmi(monitor_get_cpu_index(), errp);
>> #endif
>> diff --git a/hw/s390x/s390-virtio.c b/hw/s390x/s390-virtio.c
>> index 93c7ace..9c5b7b2 100644
>> --- a/hw/s390x/s390-virtio.c
>> +++ b/hw/s390x/s390-virtio.c
>> @@ -38,6 +38,7 @@
>> #include "hw/s390x/sclp.h"
>> #include "hw/s390x/s390_flic.h"
>> #include "hw/s390x/s390-virtio.h"
>> +#include "hw/nmi.h"
>>
>> //#define DEBUG_S390
>>
>> @@ -51,6 +52,7 @@
>>
>> #define MAX_BLK_DEVS 10
>> #define ZIPL_FILENAME "s390-zipl.rom"
>> +#define TYPE_NMI_S390 "s390_nmi"
>>
>> static VirtIOS390Bus *s390_bus;
>> static S390CPU **ipi_states;
>> @@ -277,6 +279,9 @@ static void s390_init(MachineState *machine)
>>
>> /* Create VirtIO network adapters */
>> s390_create_virtio_net((BusState *)s390_bus, "virtio-net-s390");
>> +
>> + object_property_add_child(OBJECT(machine), "nmi",
>> + object_new(TYPE_NMI_S390), NULL);
>> }
>>
>> static QEMUMachine s390_machine = {
>> @@ -295,8 +300,34 @@ static QEMUMachine s390_machine = {
>> .is_default = 1,
>> };
>>
>> +static void s390_nmi(NMI *n, int cpu_index, Error **errp)
>> +{
>> + CPUState *cs = qemu_get_cpu(cpu_index);
>> +
>> + if (s390_cpu_restart(S390_CPU(cs))) {
>> + error_set(errp, QERR_UNSUPPORTED);
>> + }
>> +}
>> +
>> +static void s390_nmi_class_init(ObjectClass *oc, void *data)
>> +{
>> + NMIClass *nc = NMI_CLASS(oc);
>> + nc->nmi_monitor_handler = s390_nmi;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static const TypeInfo s390_nmi_info = {
>> + .name = TYPE_NMI_S390,
>> + .parent = TYPE_OBJECT,
>> + .class_init = s390_nmi_class_init,
>> + .interfaces = (InterfaceInfo[]) {
>> + { TYPE_NMI },
>> + { }
>> + },
>> +};
>> +
>> static void s390_machine_init(void)
>> {
>> + type_register_static(&s390_nmi_info);
>> qemu_register_machine(&s390_machine);
>
> I would use the /machine object itself, not an extra object. Otherwise
> this looks good.
"/machine" object is "machine" parameter from s390_init()? How do I add an
interface to it? Create a machine class as it is done by
spapr_machine_info? I am not that familiar with QOM and definitely miss
something.
>
> Paolo
>
>> }
>>
>> diff --git a/target-s390x/cpu.c b/target-s390x/cpu.c
>> index c3082b7..15142ff 100644
>> --- a/target-s390x/cpu.c
>> +++ b/target-s390x/cpu.c
>> @@ -27,6 +27,7 @@
>> #include "qemu-common.h"
>> #include "qemu/timer.h"
>> #include "hw/hw.h"
>> +#include "qapi/qmp/qerror.h"
>> #ifndef CONFIG_USER_ONLY
>> #include "sysemu/arch_init.h"
>> #endif
>>
>
--
Alexey
[Qemu-devel] [PATCH v6 2/4] target-s390x: Migrate to new NMI interface, Alexey Kardashevskiy, 2014/06/11
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v6 2/4] target-s390x: Migrate to new NMI interface, Cornelia Huck, 2014/06/12
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v6 2/4] target-s390x: Migrate to new NMI interface, Cornelia Huck, 2014/06/12
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v6 2/4] target-s390x: Migrate to new NMI interface, Alexey Kardashevskiy, 2014/06/12
[Qemu-devel] [PATCH v6 4/4] target-ppc: Add support for new NMI interface, Alexey Kardashevskiy, 2014/06/11