qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH v15 03/11] target/s390x/cpu topology: handle STSI(15) and bui


From: Pierre Morel
Subject: Re: [PATCH v15 03/11] target/s390x/cpu topology: handle STSI(15) and build the SYSIB
Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2023 15:16:53 +0100
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.7.1



On 2/9/23 17:39, Nina Schoetterl-Glausch wrote:
On Wed, 2023-02-01 at 14:20 +0100, Pierre Morel wrote:
On interception of STSI(15.1.x) the System Information Block
(SYSIB) is built from the list of pre-ordered topology entries.

Signed-off-by: Pierre Morel <pmorel@linux.ibm.com>
---
  include/hw/s390x/cpu-topology.h |  22 +++
  include/hw/s390x/sclp.h         |   1 +
  target/s390x/cpu.h              |  72 +++++++
  hw/s390x/cpu-topology.c         |  10 +
  target/s390x/kvm/cpu_topology.c | 335 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
  target/s390x/kvm/kvm.c          |   5 +-
  target/s390x/kvm/meson.build    |   3 +-
  7 files changed, 446 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
  create mode 100644 target/s390x/kvm/cpu_topology.c

[...]
+
+/**
+ * s390_topology_from_cpu:
+ * @cpu: The S390CPU
+ *
+ * Initialize the topology id from the CPU environment.
+ */
+static s390_topology_id s390_topology_from_cpu(S390CPU *cpu)
+{
+    s390_topology_id topology_id = {0};
+
+    topology_id.drawer = cpu->env.drawer_id;
+    topology_id.book = cpu->env.book_id;
+    topology_id.socket = cpu->env.socket_id;
+    topology_id.origin = cpu->env.core_id / 64;
+    topology_id.type = S390_TOPOLOGY_CPU_IFL;
+    topology_id.dedicated = cpu->env.dedicated;
+
+    if (s390_topology.polarity == POLARITY_VERTICAL) {
+        /*
+         * Vertical polarity with dedicated CPU implies
+         * vertical high entitlement.
+         */
+        if (topology_id.dedicated) {
+            topology_id.polarity |= POLARITY_VERTICAL_HIGH;
+        } else {
+            topology_id.polarity |= cpu->env.entitlement;
+        }

Why |= instead of an assignment?
Anyway, I think you can get rid of this in the next version.
If you define the entitlement via qapi you can just put a little switch
here and convert it to the hardware definition of polarization.
(Or you just do +1, but I think the switch is easier to understand)

Oh! right thanks, it is a leftover from when dedication and polarity were in the same variable.

I change it with the QAPI enum.

Regards,
Pierre

--
Pierre Morel
IBM Lab Boeblingen



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]