[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH v15 21/23] hw/core/cpu: call qemu_init_vcpu in cpu_common_rea

From: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
Subject: Re: [PATCH v15 21/23] hw/core/cpu: call qemu_init_vcpu in cpu_common_realizefn
Date: Thu, 4 Feb 2021 14:41:13 +0100
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.6.0

On 2/4/21 11:23 AM, Claudio Fontana wrote:
> On 2/3/21 5:51 PM, Alex Bennée wrote:
>> Claudio Fontana <cfontana@suse.de> writes:
>>> move the call to qemu_init_vcpu inside cpu_common_realizefn,
>>> so it does not need to be done explicitly in each target cpu.
>>> Despite this, the way cpu realize is done continues to be not ideal;
>>> ideally the cpu_list_add would be done in common_cpu,
>>> and in this case we could avoid even more redundant open coded
>>> additional calls in target/xxx/cpu.c,
>>> but this cannot happen because target cpu code, plugins, etc
>>> now all came to rely on cpu->index
>>> (which is updated in cpu_list_add), since no particular order
>>> was defined previously, so we are stuck with the freak call
>>> order for the target cpu realizefn.
>>> After this patch the target/xxx/cpu.c realizefn body becomes:
>>> void mycpu_realizefn(DeviceState *dev, Error **errp)
>>> {
>>>     /* ... */
>>>     cpu_exec_realizefn(CPU_STATE(dev), errp);
>>>     /* ... anything that needs done pre-qemu_vcpu_init */
>>>     xcc->parent_realize(dev, errp); /* does qemu_vcpu_init */
>>>     /* ... anything that needs to be done after qemu_vcpu_init */
>>> }
>> Uggh, introducing a magic order seems like inviting trouble for later
>> on. Is there anyway we can improve things? Paolo?
> The magic order is there already. I call it "freak order" instead of "magic", 
> because this is more the result of uncontrolled code growth rather than the 
> work of magic :-)

Eventually related to this unsolved problem:

  cpu_reset() might modify architecture-specific fields allocated
  by qemu_init_vcpu(). To avoid bugs similar to the one fixed in
  commit 00d0f7cb66 when introducing new architectures, move the
  cpu_reset() calls after qemu_init_vcpu().

See discussion:

> This patch attempts to remove one degree of freedom, but the current 
> situation of cpu realizing is basically fubar. This patch attempts to improve 
> things slightly,
> but as mentioned elsewhere it basically fails to achieve the goal,
> so I am tempted to just retire it. Maybe someone interested could look at the 
> situation with new eyes (possibly even me later on).

reply via email to

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