|
From: | Matthew Rosato |
Subject: | Re: [PATCH v7 8/8] s390x/s390-virtio-ccw: add zpcii-disable machine property |
Date: | Thu, 23 Jun 2022 10:26:19 -0400 |
User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.9.1 |
On 6/23/22 9:50 AM, Pierre Morel wrote:
On 6/22/22 17:20, Matthew Rosato wrote:On 6/22/22 4:50 AM, Pierre Morel wrote:On 6/6/22 22:36, Matthew Rosato wrote:The zpcii-disable machine property can be used to force-disable the use of zPCI interpretation facilities for a VM. By default, this setting will be off for machine 7.1 and newer. Signed-off-by: Matthew Rosato <mjrosato@linux.ibm.com> --- hw/s390x/s390-pci-kvm.c | 4 +++- hw/s390x/s390-virtio-ccw.c | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++++++ include/hw/s390x/s390-virtio-ccw.h | 1 + qemu-options.hx | 8 +++++++- util/qemu-config.c | 4 ++++ 5 files changed, 39 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/hw/s390x/s390-pci-kvm.c b/hw/s390x/s390-pci-kvm.c index 9134fe185f..5eb7fd12e2 100644 --- a/hw/s390x/s390-pci-kvm.c +++ b/hw/s390x/s390-pci-kvm.c @@ -22,7 +22,9 @@ bool s390_pci_kvm_interp_allowed(void) { - return kvm_s390_get_zpci_op() && !s390_is_pv(); + return (kvm_s390_get_zpci_op() && !s390_is_pv() && + !object_property_get_bool(OBJECT(qdev_get_machine()), + "zpcii-disable", NULL)); }Isn't it a duplication of machine_get_zpcii_disable?No, this will actually trigger machine_get_zpcii_disable -- it was setup as the 'getter' routine in s390_machine_initfn() -- see below:OK, I did not explain myself correctly:I was curious why we do not use directly ms->zpci_disabled and use the getter.
To do so, we'd have to either call machine_get_zpcii_disable directly from here or duplicate the work machine_get_zpcii_disable does by casting the machine to S390CcwMachineState so we could look at ms->zpcii_disabled. We can't call machine_get_zpcii_disable directly as-is, it's a static routine in s390-virtio-ccw.c -- making a 'getter' routine public seems wrong, so we are left with recreating the cast and looking at ms->zpcii_disabled here; but as far as I can figure the point is to have a unified interface for querying a machine property value via object_property_get_*(). Why wouldn't we use that interface?
FWIW, I modeled this after the way we today handle aes-key-wrap in target/s390x/kvm/kvm.c and loadparm in hw/s390x/ipl.c (albeit we use object_property_get_str for the latter since it's a different property type).
Does not mean it is false. Far from. >>Wouldn't it better go to hw/s390x/kvm/ ?There get the MachineState *ms = MACHINE(qdev_get_machine()) and return the ms->zpcii_disable?int s390_pci_kvm_aif_enable(S390PCIBusDevice *pbdev, ZpciFib *fib, bool assist)diff --git a/hw/s390x/s390-virtio-ccw.c b/hw/s390x/s390-virtio-ccw.c index cc3097bfee..70229b102b 100644 --- a/hw/s390x/s390-virtio-ccw.c +++ b/hw/s390x/s390-virtio-ccw.c@@ -645,6 +645,21 @@ static inline void machine_set_dea_key_wrap(Object *obj, bool value,ms->dea_key_wrap = value; }+static inline bool machine_get_zpcii_disable(Object *obj, Error **errp)+{ + S390CcwMachineState *ms = S390_CCW_MACHINE(obj); + + return ms->zpcii_disable; +} + +static inline void machine_set_zpcii_disable(Object *obj, bool value, + Error **errp) +{ + S390CcwMachineState *ms = S390_CCW_MACHINE(obj); + + ms->zpcii_disable = value; +} + static S390CcwMachineClass *current_mc; /*@@ -740,6 +755,13 @@ static inline void s390_machine_initfn(Object *obj) "Up to 8 chars in set of [A-Za-z0-9. ] (lower case chars converted" " to upper case) to pass to machine loader, boot manager,"" and guest kernel"); + + object_property_add_bool(obj, "zpcii-disable", + machine_get_zpcii_disable,^^ Here.
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |