Re: [PATCH 1/1] ppc/pnv.c: add a friendly warning when accel=kvm is used

[David Gibson]

On Fri, Nov 26, 2021 at 06:51:38PM +0100, Cédric le Goater wrote:
> On 11/26/21 02:11, David Gibson wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 25, 2021 at 07:42:02PM -0300, Daniel Henrique Barboza wrote:
> > > If one tries to use -machine powernv9,accel=kvm in a Power9 host, a
> > > cryptic error will be shown:
> > > 
> > > qemu-system-ppc64: Register sync failed... If you're using kvm-hv.ko, 
> > > only "-cpu host" is possible
> > > qemu-system-ppc64: kvm_init_vcpu: kvm_arch_init_vcpu failed (0): Invalid 
> > > argument
> > > 
> > > Appending '-cpu host' will throw another error:
> > > 
> > > qemu-system-ppc64: invalid chip model 'host' for powernv9 machine
> > > 
> > > The root cause is that in IBM PowerPC we have different specs for the 
> > > bare-metal
> > > and the guests. The bare-metal follows OPAL, the guests follow PAPR. The 
> > > kernel
> > > KVM modules presented in the ppc kernels implements PAPR. This means that 
> > > we
> > > can't use KVM accel when using the powernv machine, which is the 
> > > emulation of
> > > the bare-metal host.
> > > 
> > > All that said, let's give a more informative error in this case.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Daniel Henrique Barboza <danielhb413@gmail.com>
> > > ---
> > >   hw/ppc/pnv.c | 5 +++++
> > >   1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/hw/ppc/pnv.c b/hw/ppc/pnv.c
> > > index 71e45515f1..e5b87e8730 100644
> > > --- a/hw/ppc/pnv.c
> > > +++ b/hw/ppc/pnv.c
> > > @@ -742,6 +742,11 @@ static void pnv_init(MachineState *machine)
> > >       DriveInfo *pnor = drive_get(IF_MTD, 0, 0);
> > >       DeviceState *dev;
> > > +    if (kvm_enabled()) {
> > > +        error_report("The powernv machine does not work with KVM 
> > > acceleration");
> > > +        exit(EXIT_FAILURE);
> > > +    }
> > 
> > 
> > Hmm.. my only concern here is that powernv could, at least
> > theoretically, work with KVM PR.  I don't think it does right now,
> > though.
> 
> At the same time, it is nice to not let the user think that it could work
> in its current state. Don't you think so ?

Right, I'm thinking of the implication if you have an old qemu but a
new KVM which let it work.  Chances of KVM actually implementing this
probably aren't good though, so requiring the qemu update if we ever
do is probably the better deal.

-- 
David Gibson                    | I'll have my music baroque, and my code
david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au  | minimalist, thank you.  NOT _the_ _other_
                                | _way_ _around_!
http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson

signature.asc
Description: PGP signature