From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:39540) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dsqL0-0006iU-Pc for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 15 Sep 2017 09:07:19 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dsqKw-0006K5-Ov for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 15 Sep 2017 09:07:18 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:60366) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dsqKw-0006Jb-IR for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 15 Sep 2017 09:07:14 -0400 Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2017 15:07:05 +0200 From: Cornelia Huck Message-ID: <20170915150705.359a5356.cohuck@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <37791e7b-c096-3e88-4121-4f1739615367@redhat.com> References: <20170915101406.27823-1-cohuck@redhat.com> <20170915101406.27823-2-cohuck@redhat.com> <37791e7b-c096-3e88-4121-4f1739615367@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH RFC 1/1] s390x/ccw: create s390 phb for compat reasons as well List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: David Hildenbrand Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, borntraeger@de.ibm.com, agraf@suse.de, thuth@redhat.com, pmorel@linux.vnet.ibm.com, zyimin@linux.vnet.ibm.com, pasic@linux.vnet.ibm.com On Fri, 15 Sep 2017 13:57:40 +0200 David Hildenbrand wrote: > As an alternative, simply > > diff --git a/target/s390x/cpu_models.c b/target/s390x/cpu_models.c > index 0f28ebd162..0f22efc3b6 100644 > --- a/target/s390x/cpu_models.c > +++ b/target/s390x/cpu_models.c > @@ -195,6 +195,8 @@ bool s390_has_feat(S390Feat feat) > return true; > } > } > + if (feat == S390_FEAT_ZPCI) > + return true; Move that out of the CONFIG_KVM #ifdef? (Also, we still have the issue with pci support :/ - depend on pci_available?) > #endif > return 0; > } > > > (this is also the way we handle other features without cpu model support > -especially if cpu model support is disabled for older machines) Now that you mention cpu models (which are disabled on old machines), the failure starts to look plausible :)