[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [RFC v4 9/9] i386: split cpu accelerators from cpu.c
From: |
Claudio Fontana |
Subject: |
Re: [RFC v4 9/9] i386: split cpu accelerators from cpu.c |
Date: |
Fri, 20 Nov 2020 19:47:11 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.12.0 |
On 11/20/20 6:44 PM, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 20, 2020 at 03:49:09PM +0100, Claudio Fontana wrote:
>> split cpu.c into:
>>
>> cpu.c cpuid and common x86 cpu functionality
>> host-cpu.c host x86 cpu functions and "host" cpu type
>> kvm/cpu.c KVM x86 cpu type
>> hvf/cpu.c HVF x86 cpu type
>> tcg/cpu.c TCG x86 cpu type
>>
>> The link to the accel class is set in the X86CPUClass classes
>> at MODULE_INIT_ACCEL_CPU time, when the accelerator is known.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Claudio Fontana <cfontana@suse.de>
> [...]
>> +static void hvf_cpu_accel_class_init(ObjectClass *oc, void *data)
>> +{
>> + X86CPUAccelClass *acc = X86_CPU_ACCEL_CLASS(oc);
>> +
>> + acc->cpu_realizefn = host_cpu_realizefn;
>> + acc->cpu_common_class_init = hvf_cpu_common_class_init;
>> + acc->cpu_instance_init = hvf_cpu_instance_init;
>> +};
>> +static const TypeInfo hvf_cpu_accel_type_info = {
>> + .name = X86_CPU_ACCEL_TYPE_NAME("hvf"),
>> +
>> + .parent = TYPE_X86_CPU_ACCEL,
>> + .class_init = hvf_cpu_accel_class_init,
>> +};
>> +static void hvf_cpu_accel_register_types(void)
>> +{
>> + type_register_static(&hvf_cpu_accel_type_info);
>> +}
>> +type_init(hvf_cpu_accel_register_types);
>> +
>> +static void hvf_cpu_accel_init(void)
>> +{
>> + if (hvf_enabled()) {
>> + x86_cpu_accel_init(X86_CPU_ACCEL_TYPE_NAME("hvf"));
>> + }
>> +}
>> +
>> +accel_cpu_init(hvf_cpu_accel_init);
>
> The point of my suggestion of using QOM is to not require
> separate accel_cpu_init() functions and (hvf|tcg|kvm)_enabled()
> checks.
>
> If we still have separate accel_cpu_init() functions for calling
> x86_cpu_accel_init() with the right argument, using a pointer to
> static variables like &hvf_cpu_accel (like you did before) was
> simpler and required less boilerplate code.
Yes I agree.
>
> However, the difference is that with the X86_CPU_ACCEL_TYPE_NAME
> macro + object_class_by_name(), you don't need the separate
> accel_cpu_init() functions for each accelerator.
>
> All you need is a single:
>
> x86_cpu_accel_init(X86_CPU_ACCEL_TYPE_NAME(chosen_accel_name));
>
> call somewhere in the initialization path.
Makes sense. The problem is just determining chosen_accel_name.
>
> A good place for the x86_cpu_accel_init() call would be
> do_configure_accelerator(), but the function is arch-specific.
> That's why I suggested a cpu_accel_arch_init() function at
> 20201118220750.GP1509407@habkost.net">https://lore.kernel.org/qemu-devel/20201118220750.GP1509407@habkost.net
>
Fine by me. I'd use a specific init step for this, but that also works.
Ciao,
Clauidio
- [RFC v4 4/9] i386: hvf: remove stale MAINTAINERS entry for old hvf stubs, (continued)
- [RFC v4 4/9] i386: hvf: remove stale MAINTAINERS entry for old hvf stubs, Claudio Fontana, 2020/11/20
- [RFC v4 3/9] i386: move hax accel files into hax/, Claudio Fontana, 2020/11/20
- [RFC v4 5/9] i386: move TCG accel files into tcg/, Claudio Fontana, 2020/11/20
- [RFC v4 6/9] i386: move cpu dump out of helper.c into cpu-dump.c, Claudio Fontana, 2020/11/20
- [RFC v4 7/9] i386: move TCG cpu class initialization out of helper.c, Claudio Fontana, 2020/11/20
- [RFC v4 8/9] module: introduce MODULE_INIT_ACCEL_CPU, Claudio Fontana, 2020/11/20
- [RFC v4 9/9] i386: split cpu accelerators from cpu.c, Claudio Fontana, 2020/11/20
[RFC v4 2/9] i386: move whpx accel files into whpx/, Claudio Fontana, 2020/11/20
[RFC v4 1/9] i386: move kvm accel files into kvm/, Claudio Fontana, 2020/11/20
Re: [RFC v4 0/9] i386 cleanup, no-reply, 2020/11/20