On 20.02.15 20:43, Michael Mueller wrote: > On Fri, 20 Feb 2015 18:50:20 +0100 > Alexander Graf <agraf@xxxxxxx> wrote: > >> >> >> >>> Am 20.02.2015 um 18:37 schrieb Michael Mueller <mimu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: >>> >>> On Fri, 20 Feb 2015 17:57:52 +0100 >>> Alexander Graf <agraf@xxxxxxx> wrote: >>> >>>> Because all CPUs we have in our list only expose 128 bits? >>> >>> Here a STFLE result on a EC12 GA2, already more than 128 bits... Is that model on the list? >> >> If that model has 3 elements, yes, the array should span 3. >> >> I hope it's in the list. Every model wecare about should be, no? >> > > On my list? Yes! > >>> >>> [mimu@p57lp59 s390xfac]$ ./s390xfac -b >>> fac[0] = 0xfbfffffbfcfff840 >>> fac[1] = 0xffde000000000000 >>> fac[2] = 0x1800000000000000 >>>> >>>>> I want to have this independent from a future machine of the z/Arch. The kernel stores the >>>>> full facility set, KVM does and there is no good reason for QEMU not to do. If other >>>>> accelerators decide to just implement 64 or 128 bits of facilities that's ok... >>>> >>>> So you want to support CPUs that are not part of the list? >>> >>> The architecture at least defines more than 2 or 3. Do you want me to limit it to an arbitrary >>> size?. Only in QEMU or also in the KVM interface? >> >> Only internally in QEMU. The kvm interface should definitely be as big as the spec allows! > > Right, now we're on the same page again. That can be taken in consideration. ... Although it's > just and optimization. :-) Yeah. You could also consider using the QEMU built-in bitmap type and functions and just convert from there. That would give you native support for bit values > 64. Alex -- 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
