On Sat, Jul 11, 2015 at 3:23 PM, Paolo Bonzini <pbonz...@redhat.com> wrote:
>
>
> On 11/07/2015 22:46, Peter Crosthwaite wrote:
>> include/exec/ram_addr.h: if (tcg_enabled()) {
>> include/exec/ram_addr.h: uint8_t clients = tcg_enabled() ?
>> DIRTY_CLIENTS_ALL : DIRTY_CLIENTS_NOCODE;
>> memory.c: mr->dirty_log_mask = tcg_enabled() ? (1 << DIRTY_MEMORY_CODE) :
>> 0;
>> memory.c: mr->dirty_log_mask = tcg_enabled() ? (1 << DIRTY_MEMORY_CODE) :
>> 0;
>> memory.c: mr->dirty_log_mask = tcg_enabled() ? (1 << DIRTY_MEMORY_CODE) :
>> 0;
>> memory.c: mr->dirty_log_mask = tcg_enabled() ? (1 << DIRTY_MEMORY_CODE) :
>> 0;
>>
>> So what is the correct logic for populating dirty_log_mask and friends
>> when there are 0. 1, or more TCG engines?
>
> I think it should be set if there's at least one TCG engine.
>
Thanks. So translate-common.c will implement a global
tcg_any_enabled() for these cases, while others will use a
virtualised/local tcg_enabled().
> Have you checked BTW it the DIRTY_MEMORY_CODE stuff works with multiple
> tcg_ctxs _and_ the same page hosts code for more than one CPU type?
> Offhand I have no idea of the answer...
>
No, I haven't progressed that far. I have a basic test for shared data
area but not shared code.
Regards,
Peter
> Paolo
>
