From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:60161) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1X2Xu0-0007pX-9c for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 02 Jul 2014 23:41:45 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1X2Xtu-0001Ad-UO for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 02 Jul 2014 23:41:40 -0400 Received: from mail-pa0-f41.google.com ([209.85.220.41]:55342) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1X2Xtu-0001AT-Lw for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 02 Jul 2014 23:41:34 -0400 Received: by mail-pa0-f41.google.com with SMTP id fb1so13599388pad.14 for ; Wed, 02 Jul 2014 20:41:33 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <53B4D0E8.5070600@ozlabs.ru> Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2014 13:41:28 +1000 From: Alexey Kardashevskiy MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1404117329-7899-1-git-send-email-nikunj@linux.vnet.ibm.com> In-Reply-To: <1404117329-7899-1-git-send-email-nikunj@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=KOI8-R Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v5] ppc: spapr-rtas - implement os-term rtas call List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Nikunj A Dadhania , qemu-devel@nongnu.org Cc: Tyrel Datwyler , Benjamin Herrenschmidt , qemu-ppc@nongnu.org, Anton Blanchard , Alexander Graf 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 > CC: Anton Blanchard > CC: Alexander Graf > CC: Tyrel Datwyler > Signed-off-by: Nikunj A Dadhania > > --- > > 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. > > #define RTAS_TOKEN_MAX (RTAS_TOKEN_BASE + 0x21) > > -- Alexey