[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [qemu-s390x] hw/s390x/ipl: Dubious use of qdev_reset_all_fn
From: |
David Hildenbrand |
Subject: |
Re: [qemu-s390x] hw/s390x/ipl: Dubious use of qdev_reset_all_fn |
Date: |
Tue, 28 May 2019 10:29:09 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.6.1 |
On 24.05.19 21:45, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
>
>
> On 24.05.19 21:00, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>> On 24.05.19 20:36, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>>> On 24.05.19 20:28, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 24.05.19 20:04, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>>>>> On 24.05.19 19:54, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
>>>>>> Hi Christian,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm having hard time to understand why the S390_IPL object calls
>>>>>> qemu_register_reset(qdev_reset_all_fn) in its realize() method, while
>>>>>> being QOM'ified (it has a reset method).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It doesn't seem to have a qdev children added explicitly to it.
>>>>>> I see it is used as a singleton, what else am I missing?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Phil.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Looks like I added it back then (~4 years ago) when converting it into a
>>>>> TYPE_DEVICE.
>>>>>
>>>>> I could imagine that - back then - this was needed because only
>>>>> TYPE_SYS_BUS_DEVICE would recursively get reset.
>>>>
>>>> Yes, back then singleton devices were not recursively resetted. Has that
>>>> changed?
>>>
>>> Hacking that call out, I don't see it getting called anymore. So it is
>>> still required. The question is if it can be reworked.
>>>
>>
>> Yes, as it is not a sysbus device, it won't get reset.
>> The owner (machine) has to take care of this. The following works:
>>
>>
>> diff --git a/hw/s390x/ipl.c b/hw/s390x/ipl.c
>> index b93750c14e..91a31c2cd0 100644
>> --- a/hw/s390x/ipl.c
>> +++ b/hw/s390x/ipl.c
>> @@ -232,7 +232,6 @@ static void s390_ipl_realize(DeviceState *dev, Error
>> **errp)
>> */
>> ipl->compat_start_addr = ipl->start_addr;
>> ipl->compat_bios_start_addr = ipl->bios_start_addr;
>> - qemu_register_reset(qdev_reset_all_fn, dev);
>> error:
>> error_propagate(errp, err);
>> }
>> diff --git a/hw/s390x/s390-virtio-ccw.c b/hw/s390x/s390-virtio-ccw.c
>> index bbc6e8fa0b..658ab529a1 100644
>> --- a/hw/s390x/s390-virtio-ccw.c
>> +++ b/hw/s390x/s390-virtio-ccw.c
>> @@ -338,6 +338,11 @@ static inline void s390_do_cpu_ipl(CPUState *cs,
>> run_on_cpu_data arg)
>> s390_cpu_set_state(S390_CPU_STATE_OPERATING, cpu);
>> }
>>
>> +static void s390_ipl_reset(void)
>> +{
>> + qdev_reset_all(DEVICE(object_resolve_path_type("", TYPE_S390_IPL,
>> NULL)));
>> +}
>> +
>> static void s390_machine_reset(void)
>> {
>> enum s390_reset reset_type;
>> @@ -353,6 +358,7 @@ static void s390_machine_reset(void)
>> case S390_RESET_EXTERNAL:
>> case S390_RESET_REIPL:
>> qemu_devices_reset();
>> + s390_ipl_reset();
>> s390_crypto_reset();
>>
>> /* configure and start the ipl CPU only */
>>
>
> While this patch is certainly ok, I find it disturbing that qdev devices are
> being resetted,
> but qom devices not.
>
Shall I send that as a proper patch, or do we want to stick to the
existing approach until we have improved the general reset approach?
--
Thanks,
David / dhildenb
- Re: [qemu-s390x] hw/s390x/ipl: Dubious use of qdev_reset_all_fn, (continued)
- Re: [qemu-s390x] hw/s390x/ipl: Dubious use of qdev_reset_all_fn, David Hildenbrand, 2019/05/24
- Re: [qemu-s390x] hw/s390x/ipl: Dubious use of qdev_reset_all_fn, Christian Borntraeger, 2019/05/24
- Re: [qemu-s390x] hw/s390x/ipl: Dubious use of qdev_reset_all_fn, David Hildenbrand, 2019/05/24
- Re: [qemu-s390x] [Qemu-devel] hw/s390x/ipl: Dubious use of qdev_reset_all_fn, Peter Maydell, 2019/05/25
- Re: [qemu-s390x] [Qemu-devel] hw/s390x/ipl: Dubious use of qdev_reset_all_fn, Markus Armbruster, 2019/05/27
- Re: [qemu-s390x] [Qemu-devel] hw/s390x/ipl: Dubious use of qdev_reset_all_fn, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé, 2019/05/27
- Re: [qemu-s390x] [Qemu-devel] hw/s390x/ipl: Dubious use of qdev_reset_all_fn, Peter Maydell, 2019/05/27
- Re: [qemu-s390x] [Qemu-devel] hw/s390x/ipl: Dubious use of qdev_reset_all_fn, Markus Armbruster, 2019/05/28
- Re: [qemu-s390x] [Qemu-devel] hw/s390x/ipl: Dubious use of qdev_reset_all_fn, Markus Armbruster, 2019/05/29
- Re: [qemu-s390x] [Qemu-devel] hw/s390x/ipl: Dubious use of qdev_reset_all_fn, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé, 2019/05/29
- Re: [qemu-s390x] hw/s390x/ipl: Dubious use of qdev_reset_all_fn,
David Hildenbrand <=
- Re: [qemu-s390x] hw/s390x/ipl: Dubious use of qdev_reset_all_fn, Cornelia Huck, 2019/05/28
- Re: [qemu-s390x] hw/s390x/ipl: Dubious use of qdev_reset_all_fn, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé, 2019/05/28
Re: [qemu-s390x] hw/s390x/ipl: Dubious use of qdev_reset_all_fn, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé, 2019/05/24