On 11/15/22 14:48, Cédric Le Goater wrote:
On 11/3/22 18:01, Pierre Morel wrote:
We keep the possibility to switch on/off the topology on newer
machines with the property topology=[on|off].
The code has changed. You will need to rebase. May be after the
8.0 machine is introduced, or include Cornelia's patch in the
respin.
https://lore.kernel.org/qemu-devel/20221111124534.129111-1-cohuck@xxxxxxxxxx/
Signed-off-by: Pierre Morel <pmorel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
include/hw/boards.h | 3 +++
include/hw/s390x/cpu-topology.h | 8 +++-----
include/hw/s390x/s390-virtio-ccw.h | 1 +
hw/core/machine.c | 3 +++
hw/s390x/cpu-topology.c | 19 +++++++++++++++++++
hw/s390x/s390-virtio-ccw.c | 28 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
util/qemu-config.c | 4 ++++
qemu-options.hx | 6 +++++-
8 files changed, 66 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/hw/boards.h b/include/hw/boards.h
index 311ed17e18..67147c47bf 100644
--- a/include/hw/boards.h
+++ b/include/hw/boards.h
@@ -379,6 +379,9 @@ struct MachineState {
} \
type_init(machine_initfn##_register_types)
+extern GlobalProperty hw_compat_7_2[];
+extern const size_t hw_compat_7_2_len;
+
extern GlobalProperty hw_compat_7_1[];
extern const size_t hw_compat_7_1_len;
diff --git a/include/hw/s390x/cpu-topology.h
b/include/hw/s390x/cpu-topology.h
index 6fec10e032..f566394302 100644
--- a/include/hw/s390x/cpu-topology.h
+++ b/include/hw/s390x/cpu-topology.h
@@ -12,6 +12,8 @@
#include "hw/qdev-core.h"
#include "qom/object.h"
+#include "cpu.h"
+#include "hw/s390x/s390-virtio-ccw.h"
#define S390_TOPOLOGY_CPU_IFL 0x03
#define S390_TOPOLOGY_MAX_ORIGIN ((63 + S390_MAX_CPUS) / 64)
@@ -38,10 +40,6 @@ struct S390Topology {
OBJECT_DECLARE_SIMPLE_TYPE(S390Topology, S390_CPU_TOPOLOGY)
void s390_topology_new_cpu(S390CPU *cpu);
-
-static inline bool s390_has_topology(void)
-{
- return false;
-}
+bool s390_has_topology(void);
#endif
diff --git a/include/hw/s390x/s390-virtio-ccw.h
b/include/hw/s390x/s390-virtio-ccw.h
index 89fca3f79f..d7602aedda 100644
--- a/include/hw/s390x/s390-virtio-ccw.h
+++ b/include/hw/s390x/s390-virtio-ccw.h
@@ -28,6 +28,7 @@ struct S390CcwMachineState {
bool dea_key_wrap;
bool pv;
bool zpcii_disable;
+ bool cpu_topology;
uint8_t loadparm[8];
void *topology;
};
diff --git a/hw/core/machine.c b/hw/core/machine.c
index aa520e74a8..4f46d4ef23 100644
--- a/hw/core/machine.c
+++ b/hw/core/machine.c
@@ -40,6 +40,9 @@
#include "hw/virtio/virtio-pci.h"
#include "qom/object_interfaces.h"
+GlobalProperty hw_compat_7_2[] = {};
+const size_t hw_compat_7_2_len = G_N_ELEMENTS(hw_compat_7_2);
+
GlobalProperty hw_compat_7_1[] = {};
const size_t hw_compat_7_1_len = G_N_ELEMENTS(hw_compat_7_1);
diff --git a/hw/s390x/cpu-topology.c b/hw/s390x/cpu-topology.c
index fc220bd8ac..c1550cc1e8 100644
--- a/hw/s390x/cpu-topology.c
+++ b/hw/s390x/cpu-topology.c
@@ -73,6 +73,25 @@ void s390_handle_ptf(S390CPU *cpu, uint8_t r1,
uintptr_t ra)
}
}
+bool s390_has_topology(void)
+{
+ static S390CcwMachineState *ccw;
+ Object *obj;
+
+ if (ccw) {
+ return ccw->cpu_topology;
Shouldn't we test the capability also ?
return s390mc->topology_capable && ccw->cpu_topology;
yes thanks
+ }
+
+ /* we have to bail out for the "none" machine */
+ obj = object_dynamic_cast(qdev_get_machine(),
+ TYPE_S390_CCW_MACHINE);
+ if (!obj) {
+ return false;
+ }
Should be an assert I think.
OK
+ ccw = S390_CCW_MACHINE(obj);
+ return ccw->cpu_topology;
+}
+
/*
* s390_topology_new_cpu:
* @cpu: a pointer to the new CPU
diff --git a/hw/s390x/s390-virtio-ccw.c b/hw/s390x/s390-virtio-ccw.c
index f1a9d6e793..ebb5615337 100644
--- a/hw/s390x/s390-virtio-ccw.c
+++ b/hw/s390x/s390-virtio-ccw.c
@@ -710,6 +710,26 @@ bool hpage_1m_allowed(void)
return get_machine_class()->hpage_1m_allowed;
}
+static inline bool machine_get_topology(Object *obj, Error **errp)
+{
+ S390CcwMachineState *ms = S390_CCW_MACHINE(obj);
+
+ return ms->cpu_topology;
+}
+
+static inline void machine_set_topology(Object *obj, bool value,
Error **errp)
+{
+ S390CcwMachineState *ms = S390_CCW_MACHINE(obj);
You could introduce :
S390CcwMachineClass *s390mc = S390_CCW_MACHINE_GET_CLASS(ms);
Yes thanks
+
+ if (!get_machine_class()->topology_capable) {
and
!s390mc->topology_capable
+ error_setg(errp, "Property cpu-topology not available on
machine %s",
+ get_machine_class()->parent_class.name);
+ return;
+ }
+
+ ms->cpu_topology = value;
+}
+
static void machine_get_loadparm(Object *obj, Visitor *v,
const char *name, void *opaque,
Error **errp)
@@ -809,6 +829,12 @@ static void ccw_machine_class_init(ObjectClass
*oc, void *data)
machine_set_zpcii_disable);
object_class_property_set_description(oc, "zpcii-disable",
"disable zPCI interpretation facilties");
+
+ object_class_property_add_bool(oc, "topology",
+ machine_get_topology,
+ machine_set_topology);
+ object_class_property_set_description(oc, "topology",
+ "enable CPU topology");
}
static inline void s390_machine_initfn(Object *obj)
@@ -818,6 +844,7 @@ static inline void s390_machine_initfn(Object *obj)
ms->aes_key_wrap = true;
ms->dea_key_wrap = true;
ms->zpcii_disable = false;
+ ms->cpu_topology = true;
}
static const TypeInfo ccw_machine_info = {
@@ -888,6 +915,7 @@ static void
ccw_machine_7_1_instance_options(MachineState *machine)
s390_cpudef_featoff_greater(16, 1, S390_FEAT_PAIE);
s390_set_qemu_cpu_model(0x8561, 15, 1, qemu_cpu_feat);
ms->zpcii_disable = true;
+ ms->cpu_topology = true;
shouldn't this be false ?
:) yes
I forgot to change this when I change the logic.
Thanks,
Pierre
--
Pierre Morel
IBM Lab Boeblingen
