public inbox for kvm@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Pierre Morel <pmorel@linux.ibm.com>
To: Nina Schoetterl-Glausch <nsg@linux.ibm.com>, qemu-s390x@nongnu.org
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, borntraeger@de.ibm.com,
	pasic@linux.ibm.com, richard.henderson@linaro.org,
	david@redhat.com, thuth@redhat.com, cohuck@redhat.com,
	mst@redhat.com, pbonzini@redhat.com, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
	ehabkost@redhat.com, marcel.apfelbaum@gmail.com,
	eblake@redhat.com, armbru@redhat.com, seiden@linux.ibm.com,
	nrb@linux.ibm.com, frankja@linux.ibm.com, berrange@redhat.com,
	clg@kaod.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v15 06/11] s390x/cpu topology: interception of PTF instruction
Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2023 10:59:29 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <f5c6b04a-0faa-ba36-9019-468662b9fbb2@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5c15ccde659a9849ab3529e08f5e1278508406c8.camel@linux.ibm.com>



On 2/6/23 19:34, Nina Schoetterl-Glausch wrote:
> On Wed, 2023-02-01 at 14:20 +0100, Pierre Morel wrote:
>> When the host supports the CPU topology facility, the PTF
>> instruction with function code 2 is interpreted by the SIE,
>> provided that the userland hypervizor activates the interpretation
>> by using the KVM_CAP_S390_CPU_TOPOLOGY KVM extension.
>>
>> The PTF instructions with function code 0 and 1 are intercepted
>> and must be emulated by the userland hypervizor.
>>
>> During RESET all CPU of the configuration are placed in
>> horizontal polarity.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Pierre Morel <pmorel@linux.ibm.com>
>> ---
>>   include/hw/s390x/s390-virtio-ccw.h |   6 ++
>>   target/s390x/cpu.h                 |   1 +
>>   hw/s390x/cpu-topology.c            | 103 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>   target/s390x/cpu-sysemu.c          |  14 ++++
>>   target/s390x/kvm/kvm.c             |  11 +++
>>   5 files changed, 135 insertions(+)
>>
> [...]
> 
>> diff --git a/hw/s390x/cpu-topology.c b/hw/s390x/cpu-topology.c
>> index cf63f3dd01..1028bf4476 100644
>> --- a/hw/s390x/cpu-topology.c
>> +++ b/hw/s390x/cpu-topology.c
>> @@ -85,16 +85,104 @@ static void s390_topology_init(MachineState *ms)
>>       QTAILQ_INSERT_HEAD(&s390_topology.list, entry, next);
>>   }
>>   
>> +/**
>> + * s390_topology_set_cpus_polarity:
>> + * @polarity: polarity requested by the caller
>> + *
>> + * Set all CPU entitlement according to polarity and
>> + * dedication.
>> + * Default vertical entitlement is POLARITY_VERTICAL_MEDIUM as
>> + * it does not require host modification of the CPU provisioning
>> + * until the host decide to modify individual CPU provisioning
>> + * using QAPI interface.
>> + * However a dedicated vCPU will have a POLARITY_VERTICAL_HIGH
>> + * entitlement.
>> + */
>> +static void s390_topology_set_cpus_polarity(int polarity)
> 
> Since you set the entitlement field I'd prefer _set_cpus_entitlement or similar.

OK if you prefer.

> 
>> +{
>> +    CPUState *cs;
>> +
>> +    CPU_FOREACH(cs) {
>> +        if (polarity == POLARITY_HORIZONTAL) {
>> +            S390_CPU(cs)->env.entitlement = 0;
>> +        } else if (S390_CPU(cs)->env.dedicated) {
>> +            S390_CPU(cs)->env.entitlement = POLARITY_VERTICAL_HIGH;
>> +        } else {
>> +            S390_CPU(cs)->env.entitlement = POLARITY_VERTICAL_MEDIUM;
>> +        }
>> +    }
>> +}
>> +
> [...]
>>   
>>   /**
>> @@ -137,6 +225,21 @@ static void s390_topology_cpu_default(S390CPU *cpu, Error **errp)
>>                             (smp->books * smp->sockets * smp->cores)) %
>>                            smp->drawers;
>>       }
> 
> Why are the changes below in this patch?

Because before thos patch we have only horizontal polarization.

> 
>> +
>> +    /*
>> +     * Machine polarity is set inside the global s390_topology structure.
>> +     * In the case the polarity is set as horizontal set the entitlement

Sorry here an error in the comment should be :
"In the case the polarity is NOT set as horizontal..."

>> +     * to POLARITY_VERTICAL_MEDIUM which is the better equivalent when
>> +     * machine polarity is set to vertical or POLARITY_VERTICAL_HIGH if
>> +     * the vCPU is dedicated.
>> +     */
>> +    if (s390_topology.polarity && !env->entitlement) {
> 
> It'd be more readable if you compared against enum values by name.

Right, I will change this to

     if (s390_topology.polarity != S390_POLARITY_HORIZONTAL &&
         env->entitlement == S390_ENTITLEMENT_UNSET) {

> 
> I don't see why you check s390_topology.polarity. If it is horizontal
> then the value of the entitlement doesn't matter at all, so you can set it
> to whatever.

Right, that is why it is done only for vertical polarization (sorry for 
the wrong comment)

> All you want to do is enforce dedicated -> VERTICAL_HIGH, right?
> So why don't you just add
> 
> +    if (cpu->env.dedicated && cpu->env.entitlement != POLARITY_VERTICAL_HIGH) {
> +        error_setg(errp, "A dedicated cpu implies high entitlement");
> +        return;
> +    } >
> to s390_topology_check?

Here it is to set the default in the case the values are not provided.

But where you are right is that I should add a verification to the check 
function.

> 
>> +        if (env->dedicated) {
>> +            env->entitlement = POLARITY_VERTICAL_HIGH;
>> +        } else {
>> +            env->entitlement = POLARITY_VERTICAL_MEDIUM;
>> +        }
> 
> If it is horizontal, then setting the entitlement is pointless as it will be
> reset to medium on PTF.

That is why the polarity is tested (sorry for the bad comment)

> So the current polarization is vertical and a cpu is being hotplugged,
> but setting the entitlement of the cpu being added is also pointless, because
> it's determined by the dedication. That seems weird.

No it is not determined by the dedication, if there is no dedication the 
3 vertical values are possible.


Regards,
Pierre

> 
>> +    }
>>   }
>>   
> 
> [...]

-- 
Pierre Morel
IBM Lab Boeblingen

  reply	other threads:[~2023-02-07 10:01 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 75+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-02-01 13:20 [PATCH v15 00/11] s390x: CPU Topology Pierre Morel
2023-02-01 13:20 ` [PATCH v15 01/11] s390x/cpu topology: adding s390 specificities to CPU topology Pierre Morel
2023-02-02 10:44   ` Thomas Huth
2023-02-02 13:15     ` Pierre Morel
2023-02-02 16:05   ` Nina Schoetterl-Glausch
2023-02-03  9:39     ` Pierre Morel
2023-02-03 11:21       ` Thomas Huth
2023-02-08 17:50   ` Nina Schoetterl-Glausch
2023-02-10 14:19     ` Pierre Morel
2023-02-01 13:20 ` [PATCH v15 02/11] s390x/cpu topology: add topology entries on CPU hotplug Pierre Morel
2023-02-02 16:42   ` Nina Schoetterl-Glausch
2023-02-03  9:21     ` Pierre Morel
2023-02-03 13:22       ` Nina Schoetterl-Glausch
2023-02-03 14:40         ` Pierre Morel
2023-02-03 15:38           ` Nina Schoetterl-Glausch
2023-02-01 13:20 ` [PATCH v15 03/11] target/s390x/cpu topology: handle STSI(15) and build the SYSIB Pierre Morel
2023-02-03 17:36   ` Nina Schoetterl-Glausch
2023-02-06 10:06     ` Pierre Morel
2023-02-06 10:32       ` Nina Schoetterl-Glausch
2023-02-06 11:24   ` Thomas Huth
2023-02-06 12:57     ` Pierre Morel
2023-02-09 16:39   ` Nina Schoetterl-Glausch
2023-02-10 14:16     ` Pierre Morel
2023-02-01 13:20 ` [PATCH v15 04/11] s390x/sclp: reporting the maximum nested topology entries Pierre Morel
2023-02-06 10:13   ` Thomas Huth
2023-02-06 10:19     ` Pierre Morel
2023-02-01 13:20 ` [PATCH v15 05/11] s390x/cpu topology: resetting the Topology-Change-Report Pierre Morel
2023-02-06 11:05   ` Thomas Huth
2023-02-06 12:50     ` Pierre Morel
2023-02-06 17:52   ` Nina Schoetterl-Glausch
2023-02-07  9:24     ` Pierre Morel
2023-02-07 10:50       ` Nina Schoetterl-Glausch
2023-02-07 12:19         ` Pierre Morel
2023-02-07 13:37           ` Nina Schoetterl-Glausch
2023-02-07 14:08             ` Pierre Morel
2023-02-01 13:20 ` [PATCH v15 06/11] s390x/cpu topology: interception of PTF instruction Pierre Morel
2023-02-06 11:38   ` Thomas Huth
2023-02-06 13:02     ` Pierre Morel
2023-02-06 18:34   ` Nina Schoetterl-Glausch
2023-02-07  9:59     ` Pierre Morel [this message]
2023-02-07 11:27       ` Nina Schoetterl-Glausch
2023-02-07 13:03         ` Pierre Morel
2023-02-01 13:20 ` [PATCH v15 07/11] target/s390x/cpu topology: activating CPU topology Pierre Morel
2023-02-06 11:57   ` Thomas Huth
2023-02-06 13:19     ` Pierre Morel
2023-02-01 13:20 ` [PATCH v15 08/11] qapi/s390x/cpu topology: x-set-cpu-topology monitor command Pierre Morel
2023-02-06 12:21   ` Thomas Huth
2023-02-06 14:03     ` Pierre Morel
2023-02-07 14:59   ` Pierre Morel
2023-02-08 18:40   ` Nina Schoetterl-Glausch
2023-02-09 13:14     ` Pierre Morel
2023-02-01 13:20 ` [PATCH v15 09/11] machine: adding s390 topology to query-cpu-fast Pierre Morel
2023-02-06 12:38   ` Thomas Huth
2023-02-06 14:12     ` Pierre Morel
2023-02-06 12:41   ` Thomas Huth
2023-02-06 12:49     ` Daniel P. Berrangé
2023-02-06 13:09       ` Thomas Huth
2023-02-06 14:50         ` Daniel P. Berrangé
2023-02-07 10:10           ` Thomas Huth
2023-02-06 14:16       ` Pierre Morel
2023-02-07 18:26   ` Nina Schoetterl-Glausch
2023-02-08  9:11     ` Pierre Morel
2023-02-01 13:20 ` [PATCH v15 10/11] qapi/s390x/cpu topology: CPU_POLARITY_CHANGE qapi event Pierre Morel
2023-02-08 17:35   ` Nina Schoetterl-Glausch
2023-02-08 19:23     ` Markus Armbruster
2023-02-09 12:28       ` Nina Schoetterl-Glausch
2023-02-09 13:00         ` Pierre Morel
2023-02-09 14:50           ` Nina Schoetterl-Glausch
2023-02-09 10:04     ` Daniel P. Berrangé
2023-02-09 12:12       ` Nina Schoetterl-Glausch
2023-02-09 12:15         ` Daniel P. Berrangé
2023-02-01 13:20 ` [PATCH v15 11/11] docs/s390x/cpu topology: document s390x cpu topology Pierre Morel
2023-02-08 16:22   ` Nina Schoetterl-Glausch
2023-02-09 17:14 ` [PATCH v15 00/11] s390x: CPU Topology Nina Schoetterl-Glausch
2023-02-10 13:23   ` Pierre Morel

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=f5c6b04a-0faa-ba36-9019-468662b9fbb2@linux.ibm.com \
    --to=pmorel@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=armbru@redhat.com \
    --cc=berrange@redhat.com \
    --cc=borntraeger@de.ibm.com \
    --cc=clg@kaod.org \
    --cc=cohuck@redhat.com \
    --cc=david@redhat.com \
    --cc=eblake@redhat.com \
    --cc=ehabkost@redhat.com \
    --cc=frankja@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=marcel.apfelbaum@gmail.com \
    --cc=mst@redhat.com \
    --cc=nrb@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=nsg@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=pasic@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    --cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
    --cc=qemu-s390x@nongnu.org \
    --cc=richard.henderson@linaro.org \
    --cc=seiden@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=thuth@redhat.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox