[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [qemu-s390x] [PATCH v6] s390x/pci: add common function measurement b

From: Pierre Morel
Subject: Re: [qemu-s390x] [PATCH v6] s390x/pci: add common function measurement block
Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2019 18:29:37 +0100
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.2.1

On 07/01/2019 12:30, David Hildenbrand wrote:
On 03.01.19 11:17, Pierre Morel wrote:
From: Yi Min Zhao <address@hidden>

Common function measurement block is used to report zPCI internal
counters of successful pcilg/stg/stb and rpcit instructions to
a memory location provided by the program.

This patch introduces a new ZpciFmb structure and schedules a timer
callback to copy the zPCI measures to the FMB in the guest memory
at an interval time set to 4s.

An error while attemping to update the FMB, would generate an error
event to the guest.

The pcilg/stg/stb and rpcit interception handlers increase the
related counter on a successful call.
The guest shall pass a null FMBA (FMB address) in the FIB (Function
Information Block) when it issues a Modify PCI Function Control
instruction to switch off FMB and stop the corresponding timer.

Signed-off-by: Yi Min Zhao <address@hidden>
Signed-off-by: Pierre Morel <address@hidden>
  hw/s390x/s390-pci-bus.c  |   4 +-
  hw/s390x/s390-pci-bus.h  |  29 +++++++++++
  hw/s390x/s390-pci-inst.c | 133 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
  hw/s390x/s390-pci-inst.h |   1 +
  4 files changed, 163 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/hw/s390x/s390-pci-bus.c b/hw/s390x/s390-pci-bus.c
index 060ff06..f0d34dd 100644
--- a/hw/s390x/s390-pci-bus.c
+++ b/hw/s390x/s390-pci-bus.c
@@ -989,6 +989,7 @@ static void s390_pcihost_hot_unplug(HotplugHandler 
      bus = pci_get_bus(pci_dev);
      devfn = pci_dev->devfn;
+    fmb_timer_free(pbdev);

I wonder if this should go into the unrealize function instead.

What make you think it should?
All zPCI specific resources are free inside the hot_unplug callback.
Why should the timer be handled differently?

The timer is not setup during realize, but later on a guest request.

AFAIK unrealize would be called after the unplug handler or is there a case for which unrealize would be called and not the hotplug handler?


Pierre Morel
Linux/KVM/QEMU in Böblingen - Germany

reply via email to

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