From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:54774) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ds6VO-0004PY-Dv for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 13 Sep 2017 08:11:04 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ds6VN-0001Te-Cw for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 13 Sep 2017 08:10:58 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:37446) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ds6VN-0001Ss-4N for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 13 Sep 2017 08:10:57 -0400 References: <20170911152150.12535-1-david@redhat.com> <20170911152150.12535-12-david@redhat.com> <20170912144330.3f07b30b@nial.brq.redhat.com> <20170913091959.336e86f3@nial.brq.redhat.com> From: David Hildenbrand Message-ID: Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2017 14:10:53 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20170913091959.336e86f3@nial.brq.redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v4 11/21] s390x: allow only 1 CPU with TCG List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Igor Mammedov , cohuck@redhat.com Cc: Matthew Rosato , Alexander Graf , thuth@redhat.com, Eduardo Habkost , Richard Henderson , Markus Armbruster , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, borntraeger@de.ibm.com, Paolo Bonzini On 13.09.2017 09:19, Igor Mammedov wrote: > On Tue, 12 Sep 2017 17:42:35 +0200 > David Hildenbrand wrote: > >> On 12.09.2017 14:43, Igor Mammedov wrote: >>> On Mon, 11 Sep 2017 17:21:40 +0200 >>> David Hildenbrand wrote: >>> >>>> Specifying more than 1 CPU (e.g. -smp 5) leads to SIGP errors (the >>>> guest tries to bring these CPUs up but fails), because we don't support >>>> multiple CPUs on s390x under TCG. >>>> >>>> Let's bail out if more than 1 is specified, so we don't raise people's >>>> hope. Make it a define, so we can easily bump it up later. >>>> >>>> Tested-by: Matthew Rosato >>>> Signed-off-by: David Hildenbrand >>>> --- >>>> hw/s390x/s390-virtio-ccw.c | 10 ++++++++++ >>>> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/hw/s390x/s390-virtio-ccw.c b/hw/s390x/s390-virtio-ccw.c >>>> index f67b4b5d58..f1198b2745 100644 >>>> --- a/hw/s390x/s390-virtio-ccw.c >>>> +++ b/hw/s390x/s390-virtio-ccw.c >>>> @@ -23,6 +23,7 @@ >>>> #include "hw/s390x/css.h" >>>> #include "virtio-ccw.h" >>>> #include "qemu/config-file.h" >>>> +#include "qemu/error-report.h" >>>> #include "s390-pci-bus.h" >>>> #include "hw/s390x/storage-keys.h" >>>> #include "hw/s390x/storage-attributes.h" >>>> @@ -47,6 +48,8 @@ S390CPU *s390_cpu_addr2state(uint16_t cpu_addr) >>>> return cpu_states[cpu_addr]; >>>> } >>>> >>>> +/* #define S390_TCG_SMP_SUPPORT */ >>> I'd drop define and ifdef for something that doesn't exists >> >> Conny requested it as we might see some work on that area (supporting >> smp) soon. So as long as there are no other opinions, I'll stick to the >> current version. >> >> Thanks! >> > I've just removed a bunch of TODO cpu models in PPC with > corresponding macro, my guess they were also introduced > with similar intent but ended up as dead code. > > So it's better to add new code when it actually is needed, > instead of just in case. > v1 of this patch had no ifdef at all. So I'll let Conny decide whether to keep it like this or whether to drop the ifdef again. -- Thanks, David