On 20 November 2015 at 15:05, Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 12 November 2015 at 16:20, Alex Bennée <alex.bennee@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> As we haven't always had guest debug support we need to probe for it.
>> Additionally we don't do this in the start-up capability code so we
>> don't fall over on old kernels.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Alex Bennée <alex.bennee@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> target-arm/kvm64.c | 18 ++++++++++++++++++
>> 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/target-arm/kvm64.c b/target-arm/kvm64.c
>> index ceebfeb..d087794 100644
>> --- a/target-arm/kvm64.c
>> +++ b/target-arm/kvm64.c
>> @@ -25,6 +25,22 @@
>> #include "internals.h"
>> #include "hw/arm/arm.h"
>>
>> +static bool have_guest_debug;
>> +
>> +/**
>> + * kvm_arm_init_debug()
>> + * @cs: CPUState
>> + *
>> + * Check for guest debug capabilities.
>> + *
>> + */
>> +static void kvm_arm_init_debug(CPUState *cs)
>> +{
>> + have_guest_debug = kvm_check_extension(cs->kvm_state,
>> + KVM_CAP_SET_GUEST_DEBUG);
>> + return;
>> +}
>> +
>> static inline void set_feature(uint64_t *features, int feature)
>> {
>> *features |= 1ULL << feature;
>> @@ -121,6 +137,8 @@ int kvm_arch_init_vcpu(CPUState *cs)
>> }
>> cpu->mp_affinity = mpidr & ARM64_AFFINITY_MASK;
>>
>> + kvm_arm_init_debug(cs);
>> +
>> return kvm_arm_init_cpreg_list(cpu);
>> }
>
> I assume in practice the kernel guarantees that either all
> CPUs have the SET_GUEST_DEBUG cap, or none do :-)
>
> Reviewed-by: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@xxxxxxxxxx>
...except I've just noticed that nothing else in this patchset
ever reads the have_guest_debug bool we just set, so what is
the purpose of this patch?
thanks
-- PMM
--
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
