Alexander Graf <agraf@xxxxxxx> writes:
> On 05.06.14 14:21, Alexander Graf wrote:
>>
>> On 05.06.14 14:08, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
>>> We don't have SMT support yet, hence we should not find a doorbell
>>> message generated
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Aneesh Kumar K.V <aneesh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>> arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_emulate.c | 18 ++++++++++++++++++
>>> 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_emulate.c
>>> b/arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_emulate.c
>>> index 1bb16a59dcbc..d6c87d085182 100644
>>> --- a/arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_emulate.c
>>> +++ b/arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_emulate.c
>>> @@ -28,7 +28,9 @@
>>> #define OP_19_XOP_RFI 50
>>> #define OP_31_XOP_MFMSR 83
>>> +#define OP_31_XOP_MSGSNDP 142
>>> #define OP_31_XOP_MTMSR 146
>>> +#define OP_31_XOP_MSGCLRP 174
>>> #define OP_31_XOP_MTMSRD 178
>>> #define OP_31_XOP_MTSR 210
>>> #define OP_31_XOP_MTSRIN 242
>>> @@ -303,6 +305,22 @@ int kvmppc_core_emulate_op_pr(struct kvm_run
>>> *run, struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
>>> break;
>>> }
>>> + case OP_31_XOP_MSGSNDP:
>>> + {
>>> + /*
>>> + * PR KVM still don't support SMT mode. So we should
>>
>> still?
>>
>>> + * not see a MSGSNDP/MSGCLRP used with PR KVM
>>> + */
>>> + pr_info("KVM: MSGSNDP used in non SMT case\n");
>>> + emulated = EMULATE_FAIL;
>>
>> What would happen on an HV guest with only 1 thread that MSGSNDs to
>> thread 0? Would the guest get an illegal instruction trap, a
>> self-interrupt or would this be a simple nop?
>
> What I'm trying to say here is that it's ok to treat it as illegal
> instructions, but then we don't need this patch :).
>
Agreed. I will verify whether it is treated as a nop. If so will send an
updated patch.
-aneesh
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
