From: Igor Mammedov <imammedo@redhat.com>
To: Gleb Natapov <gleb@redhat.com>
Cc: aliguori@us.ibm.com, ehabkost@redhat.com, jan.kiszka@siemens.com,
mtosatti@redhat.com, mdroth@linux.vnet.ibm.com,
qemu-devel@nongnu.org, blauwirbel@gmail.com, avi@redhat.com,
pbonzini@redhat.com, afaerber@suse.de
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/2] target-i386: move cpu halted decision into x86_cpu_reset
Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2012 15:09:30 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4FFECC8A.5030501@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120712063827.GA31602@redhat.com>
On 07/12/2012 08:38 AM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 03:15:51PM +0200, Igor Mammedov wrote:
>> /* pc.c */
>> -int cpu_is_bsp(CPUX86State *env);
> Why remove it instead of modifying it to check BSP bit in apic base?
> I think it will make the patch smaller and open code the check does not
> look nice.
It's smaller than if I keep cpu_is_bsp() because keeping it would require
as minimum adapting Andreas' patch [1] and without cpu_is_bsp() there won't
be need in it as well.
plain check doesn't look horrible though. It's documented in patch
description and Intel's SDM also mentions APIC base and BSP bit in it. So
may be it's better to use it this way.
Anyway,
I've made a version that keeps cpu_is_bsp() with a bits from [1].
I'll send it as followup to this email, please see if that way is any better.
1) [PATCH qom-next 06/59] pc: Pass X86CPU to cpu_is_bsp()
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2012-05/msg03185.html
--
-----
Igor
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-07-12 13:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-07-10 13:15 [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/2 v2] target-i386: refactor reset handling and move it into cpu.c Igor Mammedov
2012-07-10 13:15 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/2] target-i386: move cpu halted decision into x86_cpu_reset Igor Mammedov
2012-07-12 6:38 ` Gleb Natapov
2012-07-12 13:09 ` Igor Mammedov [this message]
2012-07-12 13:22 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2] MP initialization protocol differs between cpu families, and for P6 and onward models it is up to CPU to decide if it will be BSP using this protocol, so try to model this. However there is no point in implementing MP initialization protocol in qemu. Thus first CPU is always marked as BSP Igor Mammedov
2012-07-23 7:44 ` Igor Mammedov
2012-07-23 8:06 ` Gleb Natapov
2012-07-23 11:02 ` Andreas Färber
2012-07-10 13:15 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 2/2] target-i386: move cpu_reset and reset callback to cpu.c Igor Mammedov
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2012-07-23 13:22 [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/2 v3] target-i386: refactor reset handling and move it into cpu.c Igor Mammedov
2012-07-23 13:22 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/2] target-i386: move cpu halted decision into x86_cpu_reset Igor Mammedov
2012-08-01 14:00 ` Andreas Färber
2012-08-02 10:11 ` Igor Mammedov
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=4FFECC8A.5030501@redhat.com \
--to=imammedo@redhat.com \
--cc=afaerber@suse.de \
--cc=aliguori@us.ibm.com \
--cc=avi@redhat.com \
--cc=blauwirbel@gmail.com \
--cc=ehabkost@redhat.com \
--cc=gleb@redhat.com \
--cc=jan.kiszka@siemens.com \
--cc=mdroth@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=mtosatti@redhat.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).