qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[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: Alexander Graf
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v6 2/4] target-s390x: Migrate to new NMI interface
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2014 11:39:41 +0200
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.5.0


On 12.06.14 11:38, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
On 06/12/2014 04:31 PM, Cornelia Huck wrote:
On Thu, 12 Jun 2014 03:03:01 +1000
Alexey Kardashevskiy <address@hidden> wrote:

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/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"
I'd prefer "s390-nmi" instead.

  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);
This only adds the nmi interface to the old s390-virtio machine; we
want this for the s390-virtio-ccw machine as well.

  }

  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);
s390-virtio-ccw needs this as well.

      qemu_register_machine(&s390_machine);
  }
The best way would probably be to put all nmi-related things into a new
file that registers the nmi type and provides an s390_register_nmi()
helper.

I pushed some version to address@hidden:aik/qemu.git , branch nmi-v7
Please have a look and give it a go - I do not have s390 kernel/images
handy. Thanks!

It does not look like we really need a new file for NMI now.
Also, should I put it under #ifdef CONFIG_USER_ONLY on s390?

The machine only ever gets compiled on for non-user, so why would you need any #ifdefs?


Alex




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]