From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:53046) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dXSNW-0002oD-GM for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 18 Jul 2017 09:17:31 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dXSNS-0004Yl-Ez for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 18 Jul 2017 09:17:30 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:37942) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dXSNS-0004YF-5H for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 18 Jul 2017 09:17:26 -0400 Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2017 15:17:21 +0200 From: Igor Mammedov Message-ID: <20170718151721.25c3d603@nial.brq.redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <20170718143009.432250d5@gondolin> References: <1500040339-119465-1-git-send-email-imammedo@redhat.com> <1500040339-119465-12-git-send-email-imammedo@redhat.com> <20170718143009.432250d5@gondolin> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 11/28] s390x: replace cpu_s390x_init() with cpu_generic_init() List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Cornelia Huck Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Andreas =?UTF-8?B?RsOkcmJlcg==?= , Eduardo Habkost , Peter Maydell , Richard Henderson , Alexander Graf , Thomas Huth On Tue, 18 Jul 2017 14:30:09 +0200 Cornelia Huck wrote: > On Fri, 14 Jul 2017 15:52:02 +0200 > Igor Mammedov wrote: > > > cpu_s390x_init() is used only *-user targets indirectly > > via cpu_init() macro and has a hack to assign ids to created > > cpus (I'm not sure if 'id' really matters to *-user emulation). > > > > So to on safe side, instead of having custom wrapper to do numbering > > replace it with cpu_generic_init() and use S390CPUClass::next_cpu_id > > which could serve the same purpose as static variable and move cpu->id > > initialization to s390_cpu_initfn for CONFIG_USER_ONLY use-case. > > > > PS: > > ifdef is ugly but it allows us to hide s390x detail that isn't > > set by *-user targets and reuse generic cpu creation utility > > for btoh machine and user emulation. > > > > Signed-off-by: Igor Mammedov > > --- > > perhaps cpu->id isn't need by CONFIG_USER_ONLY but I'd leave to it > > s390x maintainers to deal with it. > > > > CC: Richard Henderson > > CC: Alexander Graf > > CC: Cornelia Huck > > CC: Thomas Huth > > --- > > target/s390x/cpu.h | 3 +-- > > target/s390x/cpu.c | 7 +++++++ > > target/s390x/helper.c | 14 -------------- > > 3 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/target/s390x/cpu.h b/target/s390x/cpu.h > > index bdb9bdb..b6d25c6 100644 > > --- a/target/s390x/cpu.h > > +++ b/target/s390x/cpu.h > > @@ -477,7 +477,6 @@ static inline bool get_per_in_range(CPUS390XState *env, uint64_t addr) > > void trigger_pgm_exception(CPUS390XState *env, uint32_t code, uint32_t ilen); > > #endif > > > > -S390CPU *cpu_s390x_init(const char *cpu_model); > > S390CPU *s390x_new_cpu(const char *cpu_model, int64_t id, Error **errp); > > S390CPU *cpu_s390x_create(const char *cpu_model, Error **errp); > > void s390x_translate_init(void); > > @@ -641,7 +640,7 @@ static inline unsigned int s390_cpu_set_state(uint8_t cpu_state, S390CPU *cpu) > > > > extern void subsystem_reset(void); > > > > -#define cpu_init(model) CPU(cpu_s390x_init(model)) > > +#define cpu_init(cpu_model) cpu_generic_init(TYPE_S390_CPU, cpu_model) > > #define cpu_signal_handler cpu_s390x_signal_handler > > > > void s390_cpu_list(FILE *f, fprintf_function cpu_fprintf); > > diff --git a/target/s390x/cpu.c b/target/s390x/cpu.c > > index accef03..e40a26f 100644 > > --- a/target/s390x/cpu.c > > +++ b/target/s390x/cpu.c > > @@ -303,6 +303,13 @@ static void s390_cpu_initfn(Object *obj) > > inited = true; > > s390x_translate_init(); > > } > > + > > +#if defined(CONFIG_USER_ONLY) > > + { > > + S390CPUClass *scc = S390_CPU_GET_CLASS(obj); > > + cpu->id = scc->next_cpu_id; > > + } > > +#endif > > What about the null machine, which calls cpu_init() as well? Am I > missing something? it creates only 1 cpu so for it following will be true: cpu->id == 0 and also scc->next_cpu_id == 0 at s390_cpu_initfn() time then at realize() time scc->next_cpu_id++ happens and no more cpus could be created in case of null machine. Considering no -smp support for null-machine, we shouldn't care about multiple instantiations with cpu_init() there. If we would ever start caring about -smp there, then we should explicitly create cpus with properly set properties like other boards do. > > > } > > > > static void s390_cpu_finalize(Object *obj) > > diff --git a/target/s390x/helper.c b/target/s390x/helper.c > > index aef09e1..632b030 100644 > > --- a/target/s390x/helper.c > > +++ b/target/s390x/helper.c > > @@ -129,20 +129,6 @@ out: > > return cpu; > > } > > > > -S390CPU *cpu_s390x_init(const char *cpu_model) > > -{ > > - Error *err = NULL; > > - S390CPU *cpu; > > - /* Use to track CPU ID for linux-user only */ > > - static int64_t next_cpu_id; > > - > > - cpu = s390x_new_cpu(cpu_model, next_cpu_id++, &err); > > - if (err) { > > - error_report_err(err); > > - } > > - return cpu; > > -} > > - > > #if defined(CONFIG_USER_ONLY) > > > > void s390_cpu_do_interrupt(CPUState *cs) >