On Fri, Jul 08, 2016 at 12:59:59PM +0200, Igor Mammedov wrote:
> On Fri, 8 Jul 2016 17:39:52 +1000
> David Gibson <da...@gibson.dropbear.id.au> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Jul 08, 2016 at 12:11:12PM +0530, Bharata B Rao wrote:
> > > On Fri, Jul 08, 2016 at 03:24:13PM +1000, David Gibson wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Jul 07, 2016 at 08:20:23PM +0530, Bharata B Rao wrote:
> > > > > Conditonally set stable_cpu_id for CPU threads that are created as
> > > > > part
> > > > > of spapr CPU cores. The use of stable_cpu_id is enabled for
> > > > > pseries-2.7
> > > > > onwards.
> > > > >
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Bharata B Rao <bhar...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> > > > > ---
> > > > > hw/ppc/spapr_cpu_core.c | 7 +++++++
> > > > > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
> > > > >
> > > > > diff --git a/hw/ppc/spapr_cpu_core.c b/hw/ppc/spapr_cpu_core.c
> > > > > index b104778..0ec3513 100644
> > > > > --- a/hw/ppc/spapr_cpu_core.c
> > > > > +++ b/hw/ppc/spapr_cpu_core.c
> > > > > @@ -293,8 +293,15 @@ static void spapr_cpu_core_realize(DeviceState
> > > > > *dev, Error **errp)
> > > > > for (i = 0; i < cc->nr_threads; i++) {
> > > > > char id[32];
> > > > > obj = sc->threads + i * size;
> > > > > + CPUState *cs;
> > > > >
> > > > > object_initialize(obj, size, typename);
> > > > > + cs = CPU(obj);
> > > > > +
> > > > > + /* Use core_id (which is actually cpu_dt_id) as stable CPU
> > > > > id */
> > > > > + if (cs->has_stable_cpu_id) {
> > > > > + cs->stable_cpu_id = cc->core_id + i;
> > > > > + }
> > > >
> > > > Testing cs->has_stable_cpu_id here in machine type specific code seems
> > > > really weird. It's the machine type that knows whether it has a
> > > > stable ID to give to the CPU or not, rather than the other way around.
> > > >
> > > > Since we haven't yet had a release with cpu cores, I think the right
> > > > thing is for cpu_core to unconditionally set the stable ID (and set
> > > > has_stable_id to true).
> > >
> > > Right, we can set cpu_stable_id unconditionally here since this code path
> > > (core realize) will be taken only for pseries-2.7 onwards. has_stable_id
> > > will get set as part of the property we defined in SPAPR_COMPAT_2_7.
> >
> > Hrm, that's true. But when you describe it like that it sounds like a
> > really non-obvious and fragile dependency between different components.
> that's how compat stuff is typically done for devices,
> CPUs shouldn't be an exception.
> (consistency with other devices helps here in long run)
>
> > > > The backup path that does thread-based cpu
> > > > init, can set has_stable_id to false (if that's not the default).
> > >
> > > Default is off, but turning it on for 2.7 will be inherited by 2.6
> > > and others below. Hence I have code to explicitly disable this prop
> > > for 2.6 and below via SPAPR_COMPAT_2_6.
> >
> > This is all seeming terribly awkward.
> Typically default is set the way so new machine type doesn't have
> to enable it explicitly.
>
> However the way it's done here helps not to touch/check every user
> that uses cpu_index, limiting series impact only to code that
> asks for it, it look a lot safer to got this rout for now.
David,
- I believe there's a consensus on using core-id as the stable_cpu_id.
- You weren't liking the use of a separate property user-stable-cpu-id to
control/enable the use of stable_cpu_id. After Igor's reply above, should
we stick with that approach ?
- I am planning to drop the code that introduces cpu_common_unrealize()
and that moves vmstate_[un]register() calls to qom/cpu.c as that affects
all other archs. Instead lets just check for use_stable_cpu_id from exec.c
itself and use it appropriately.
If you are ok with all the above, I shall post the next version on top
of Greg's patchset.
Regards,
Bharata.
