Re: [Qemu-ppc] [PATCH v5] ppc: spapr-rtas - implement os-term rtas call

[Alexey Kardashevskiy]

On 07/03/2014 01:41 PM, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
> On 06/30/2014 06:35 PM, Nikunj A Dadhania wrote:
>> PAPR compliant guest calls this in absence of kdump. This finally
>> reaches the guest and can be handled according to the policies set by
>> higher level tools(like taking dump) for further analysis by tools like
>> crash.
>>
>> Linux kernel calls ibm,os-term when extended property of os-term is set.
>> This makes sure that a return to the linux kernel is gauranteed.
>>
>> CC: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <address@hidden>
>> CC: Anton Blanchard <address@hidden>
>> CC: Alexander Graf <address@hidden>
>> CC: Tyrel Datwyler <address@hidden>
>> Signed-off-by: Nikunj A Dadhania <address@hidden>
>>
>> ---
>>
>> v2: rebase to ppcnext
>> v3: Do not stop the VM, and update comments
>> v4: update spapr_register_rtas and qapi_event changes
>> v5: set ibm,extended-os-term as null encoded property
>> ---
>>  hw/ppc/spapr.c         |  9 +++++++++
>>  hw/ppc/spapr_rtas.c    | 15 +++++++++++++++
>>  include/hw/ppc/spapr.h |  1 -
>>  3 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/hw/ppc/spapr.c b/hw/ppc/spapr.c
>> index 307c58d..e6c9014 100644
>> --- a/hw/ppc/spapr.c
>> +++ b/hw/ppc/spapr.c
>> @@ -520,6 +520,15 @@ static void *spapr_create_fdt_skel(hwaddr initrd_base,
>>  
>>      _FDT((fdt_property_cell(fdt, "rtas-error-log-max", 
>> RTAS_ERROR_LOG_MAX)));
>>  
>> +    /*
>> +     * According to PAPR, rtas ibm,os-term, does not gaurantee a return
>> +     * back to the guest cpu.
>> +     *
>> +     * While an additional ibm,extended-os-term property indicates that
>> +     * rtas call return will always occur. Set this property.
>> +     */
>> +    _FDT((fdt_property(fdt, "ibm,extended-os-term", NULL, 0)));
>> +
>>      _FDT((fdt_end_node(fdt)));
>>  
>>      /* interrupt controller */
>> diff --git a/hw/ppc/spapr_rtas.c b/hw/ppc/spapr_rtas.c
>> index 9ba1ba6..2ec2a8e 100644
>> --- a/hw/ppc/spapr_rtas.c
>> +++ b/hw/ppc/spapr_rtas.c
>> @@ -277,6 +277,19 @@ static void rtas_ibm_set_system_parameter(PowerPCCPU 
>> *cpu,
>>      rtas_st(rets, 0, ret);
>>  }
>>  
>> +static void rtas_ibm_os_term(PowerPCCPU *cpu,
>> +                            sPAPREnvironment *spapr,
>> +                            uint32_t token, uint32_t nargs,
>> +                            target_ulong args,
>> +                            uint32_t nret, target_ulong rets)
>> +{
>> +    target_ulong ret = 0;
>> +
>> +    qapi_event_send_guest_panicked(GUEST_PANIC_ACTION_PAUSE, &error_abort);
>> +
>> +    rtas_st(rets, 0, ret);
>> +}
>> +
>>  static struct rtas_call {
>>      const char *name;
>>      spapr_rtas_fn fn;
>> @@ -404,6 +417,8 @@ static void core_rtas_register_types(void)
>>      spapr_rtas_register(RTAS_IBM_SET_SYSTEM_PARAMETER,
>>                          "ibm,set-system-parameter",
>>                          rtas_ibm_set_system_parameter);
>> +    spapr_rtas_register(RTAS_IBM_OS_TERM, "ibm,os-term",
>> +                        rtas_ibm_os_term);
>>  }
>>  
>>  type_init(core_rtas_register_types)
>> diff --git a/include/hw/ppc/spapr.h b/include/hw/ppc/spapr.h
>> index bbba51a..4e96381 100644
>> --- a/include/hw/ppc/spapr.h
>> +++ b/include/hw/ppc/spapr.h
>> @@ -382,7 +382,6 @@ int spapr_allocate_irq_block(int num, bool lsi, bool 
>> msi);
>>  #define RTAS_GET_SENSOR_STATE                   (RTAS_TOKEN_BASE + 0x1D)
>>  #define RTAS_IBM_CONFIGURE_CONNECTOR            (RTAS_TOKEN_BASE + 0x1E)
>>  #define RTAS_IBM_OS_TERM                        (RTAS_TOKEN_BASE + 0x1F)
>> -#define RTAS_IBM_EXTENDED_OS_TERM               (RTAS_TOKEN_BASE + 0x20)
> 
> 
> So we never ever going to implement this RTAS call?
> I'd keep the number.

ah, it is in ppc-next-2.2 already. Never mind :)

> 
> 
>>  
>>  #define RTAS_TOKEN_MAX                          (RTAS_TOKEN_BASE + 0x21)
>>  
>>
> 
> 


-- 
Alexey