From: Laurent Vivier <lvivier@redhat.com>
To: "Greg Kurz" <groug@kaod.org>, "Cédric Le Goater" <clg@kaod.org>
Cc: David Gibson <david@gibson.dropbear.id.au>,
Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com>,
qemu-ppc@nongnu.org, sursingh@redhat.com,
joserz@linux.vnet.ibm.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org,
sbobroff@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [Qemu-ppc] [PATCH] target/ppc/cpu-models: set POWER9_v1.0 as POWER9 DD1
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2017 18:18:06 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <78fa4c41-92db-8676-b6ef-db9de9717844@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170628135908.4501f0a0@bahia.lab.toulouse-stg.fr.ibm.com>
On 28/06/2017 13:59, Greg Kurz wrote:
> On Wed, 28 Jun 2017 12:23:06 +0200
> Cédric Le Goater <clg@kaod.org> wrote:
>
>> On 06/28/2017 11:18 AM, Laurent Vivier wrote:
>>> On 28/06/2017 11:11, Cédric Le Goater wrote:
>>>> On 06/28/2017 10:18 AM, David Gibson wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 09:09:24AM +0200, Thomas Huth wrote:
>>>>>> On 28.06.2017 03:42, joserz@linux.vnet.ibm.com wrote:
>>>>>>> On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 04:10:55PM +0200, Laurent Vivier wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 23/06/2017 11:21, David Gibson wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 01:31:24PM +0200, Thomas Huth wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 22.06.2017 13:26, Laurent Vivier wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> CPU_POWERPC_POWER9_DD1 is 0x004E0100, so this is the POWER9 v1.0.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> When we run qemu on a POWER9 DD1 host, we must use either
>>>>>>>>>>> "-cpu host" or "-cpu POWER9", but in the latter case it fails with
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Unable to find sPAPR CPU Core definition
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> because POWER9 DD1 doesn't appear in the list of known CPUs.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> This patch fixes this by defining POWER9_v1.0 with POWER9 DD1
>>>>>>>>>>> PVR instead of CPU_POWERPC_POWER9_BASE.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Laurent Vivier <lvivier@redhat.com>
>>>>>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>>>>> target/ppc/cpu-models.c | 2 +-
>>>>>>>>>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> diff --git a/target/ppc/cpu-models.c b/target/ppc/cpu-models.c
>>>>>>>>>>> index 4d3e635..a22363c 100644
>>>>>>>>>>> --- a/target/ppc/cpu-models.c
>>>>>>>>>>> +++ b/target/ppc/cpu-models.c
>>>>>>>>>>> @@ -1144,7 +1144,7 @@
>>>>>>>>>>> POWERPC_DEF("970_v2.2", CPU_POWERPC_970_v22, 970,
>>>>>>>>>>> "PowerPC 970 v2.2")
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> - POWERPC_DEF("POWER9_v1.0", CPU_POWERPC_POWER9_BASE, POWER9,
>>>>>>>>>>> + POWERPC_DEF("POWER9_v1.0", CPU_POWERPC_POWER9_DD1, POWER9,
>>>>>>>>>>> "POWER9 v1.0")
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> POWERPC_DEF("970fx_v1.0", CPU_POWERPC_970FX_v10, 970,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I think this also makes sense for running in TCG mode to get a valid
>>>>>>>>>> real PVR there.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I'm not so convinced.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> IIUC, this will make TCG default (for now) to a DD1 POWER9. That's a)
>>>>>>>>> probably not what anyone wants - who'd select a buggy prototype and b)
>>>>>>>>> not accurate - TCG does not implement DD1's bugs.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> According to the POWER8 user manual (I didn't fine the POWER9 one):
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "3.6.3.1 Processor Version Register (PVR)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The processor revision level (PVR[16:31]) starts at x‘0100’, indicating
>>>>>>>> revision ‘1.0’. As revisions are made, bits [29:31] will indicate minor
>>>>>>>> revisions. Similarly, bits [20:23] indicate major changes."
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> POWER9 DD1 PVR is 0x004E0100, so this is really version 1.0 of the POWER9.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Perhaps we can define POWER9_v1.0 as CPU_POWERPC_POWER9_DD1, and
>>>>>>>> introduce a POWER9_v0.0 set to CPU_POWERPC_POWER9_BASE and define it as
>>>>>>>> the default one?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I like the suggestion to set a v0.0 to CPU_POWERPC_POWER9_BASE. But, I
>>>>>>> think we could have only that option, removing the
>>>>>>> CPU_POWERPC_POWER9_DD1 entry.
>>>>>> I really dislike the idea of having a CPU called "v0.0" ... we do not
>>>>>> have this for any other CPU generation, and it sounds like it could be
>>>>>> very confusing for the users (you'd need to document somewhere what the
>>>>>> v0.0 exactly means). If we really want to go this way, I think we should
>>>>>> name it "POWER9-generic" or "PowerISA-3.0" or something similar instead.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Or does somebody already know the exact PVR for DD2? If so, we could
>>>>>> simply add a POWER9_v2.0 CPU already and let the POWER9 alias point to
>>>>>> that version instead.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, I think that's a better idea. I don't know the DD2 PVR, but I'm
>>>>> pretty sure we should be able to find out from someone at IBM.
>>>>>
>>>>> I've CCed Sam & Suraj - can you ask Mikey or someone what the PVR
>>>>> value for DD2.0 will be?
>>>>
>>>> I would expect something like :
>>>>
>>>> 0x200D104980000000UL; /* P9 Nimbus DD2.0 */
>>>
>>>
>>> I would expect something like 0x004Exxxx.
>>
>> ah yes, I am mistaking the PVR and the CFAM ID.
>>
>> C.
>>
>
> According to https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/776052/
>
> POWER9 DD2's PVR is expected to be 0x004e1200
>
So, perhaps I can send a v2 of the patch with POWER9_v1.0 set to DD1
PVR, and POWER9_v2.0 set to DD2 PVR?
Thanks,
Laurent
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-06-28 16:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-06-22 11:26 [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] target/ppc/cpu-models: set POWER9_v1.0 as POWER9 DD1 Laurent Vivier
2017-06-22 11:31 ` Thomas Huth
2017-06-23 9:21 ` David Gibson
2017-06-23 14:10 ` Laurent Vivier
2017-06-28 1:42 ` [Qemu-devel] [Qemu-ppc] " joserz
2017-06-28 7:09 ` Thomas Huth
2017-06-28 8:18 ` David Gibson
2017-06-28 9:11 ` Cédric Le Goater
2017-06-28 9:18 ` Laurent Vivier
2017-06-28 10:23 ` Cédric Le Goater
2017-06-28 11:59 ` Greg Kurz
2017-06-28 16:18 ` Laurent Vivier [this message]
2017-06-28 16:41 ` Greg Kurz
2017-06-29 5:37 ` Suraj Jitindar Singh
2017-06-29 5:42 ` Suraj Jitindar Singh
2017-06-30 7:12 ` David Gibson
2017-06-30 8:52 ` Laurent Vivier
2017-06-29 6:44 ` Thomas Huth
2017-06-29 15:05 ` Eric Blake
2017-06-30 7:14 ` David Gibson
2017-06-30 7:56 ` Cédric Le Goater
2017-06-30 10:36 ` Michael Ellerman
2017-06-28 10:59 ` Laurent Vivier
2017-06-23 16:05 ` [Qemu-devel] " Thomas Huth
2017-06-28 0:58 ` [Qemu-devel] [Qemu-ppc] " Suraj Jitindar Singh
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=78fa4c41-92db-8676-b6ef-db9de9717844@redhat.com \
--to=lvivier@redhat.com \
--cc=clg@kaod.org \
--cc=david@gibson.dropbear.id.au \
--cc=groug@kaod.org \
--cc=joserz@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=qemu-ppc@nongnu.org \
--cc=sbobroff@redhat.com \
--cc=sursingh@redhat.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).