From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:33984)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <cohuck@redhat.com>) id 1eifn1-0005x7-LS
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 05 Feb 2018 07:22:28 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <cohuck@redhat.com>) id 1eifmw-0006RE-Gq
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 05 Feb 2018 07:22:27 -0500
Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2018 13:22:13 +0100
From: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <20180205132213.1f06d09c.cohuck@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <d63f7e05-648a-fb3a-aa9e-0a0dc1925276@redhat.com>
References: <20180205102935.14736-1-david@redhat.com>
	<8c8fc2e6-24b2-5206-9a75-9d5595623d9a@de.ibm.com>
	<d63f7e05-648a-fb3a-aa9e-0a0dc1925276@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2] s390x/cpumodel: model PTFF subfunctions
 for Multiple-epoch facility
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
Cc: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>, qemu-s390x@nongnu.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Richard Henderson <rth@twiddle.net>, Alexander Graf <agraf@suse.de>, Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com>

On Mon, 5 Feb 2018 12:27:33 +0100
David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com> wrote:

> On 05.02.2018 12:22, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> > Looks sane on a z14.
> > Tested-by: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>
> > 
> > 
> > On 02/05/2018 11:29 AM, David Hildenbrand wrote:  
> >> --- a/target/s390x/kvm.c
> >> +++ b/target/s390x/kvm.c
> >> @@ -2221,6 +2221,14 @@ void kvm_s390_get_host_cpu_model(S390CPUModel *model, Error **errp)
> >>          return;
> >>      }
> >>
> >> +    /* PTFF subfunctions might be indicated although kernel support missing */
> >> +    if (!test_bit(S390_FEAT_MULTIPLE_EPOCH, model->features)) {
> >> +        clear_bit(S390_FEAT_PTFF_QSIE, model->features);
> >> +        clear_bit(S390_FEAT_PTFF_QTOUE, model->features);
> >> +        clear_bit(S390_FEAT_PTFF_STOE, model->features);
> >> +        clear_bit(S390_FEAT_PTFF_STOUE, model->features);
> >> +    }
> >> +
> >>      /* with cpu model support, CMM is only indicated if really available */
> >>      if (kvm_s390_cmma_available()) {
> >>          set_bit(S390_FEAT_CMM, model->features);
> >>  
> > 
> > Do you also want to add something to check_consistency ?
> > 
> > Right now the following user error 
> > -cpu z14,mepoch=off,mepochptff=on
> > is accepted.
> > On the other hand we also have no consistency checks for other subfunctions.
> >   
> 
> Thought about that, but that implies that a CPU model runable now, will
> not run without warnings. Especially if migrating. We could add such
> checks if we would push this into stable.
> 

So, adding this check for the z14 stuff would work iff pushed into
stable - but for the other subfunctions the ship has already sailed?