Re: [PATCH 00/33] hw/cpu/arm: Remove one use of qemu_get_cpu() in A7/A15 MPCore priv

[Fabiano Rosas <farosas@suse.de>]

Cédric Le Goater <clg@kaod.org> writes:

> On 1/3/24 20:53, Fabiano Rosas wrote:
>> Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <philmd@linaro.org> writes:
>> 
>>> +Peter/Fabiano
>>>
>>> On 2/1/24 17:41, Cédric Le Goater wrote:
>>>> On 1/2/24 17:15, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
>>>>> Hi Cédric,
>>>>>
>>>>> On 2/1/24 15:55, Cédric Le Goater wrote:
>>>>>> On 12/12/23 17:29, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> When a MPCore cluster is used, the Cortex-A cores belong the the
>>>>>>> cluster container, not to the board/soc layer. This series move
>>>>>>> the creation of vCPUs to the MPCore private container.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Doing so we consolidate the QOM model, moving common code in a
>>>>>>> central place (abstract MPCore parent).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Changing the QOM hierarchy has an impact on the state of the machine
>>>>>> and some fixups are then required to maintain migration compatibility.
>>>>>> This can become a real headache for KVM machines like virt for which
>>>>>> migration compatibility is a feature, less for emulated ones.
>>>>>
>>>>> All changes are either moving properties (which are not migrated)
>>>>> or moving non-migrated QOM members (i.e. pointers of ARMCPU, which
>>>>> is still migrated elsewhere). So I don't see any obvious migration
>>>>> problem, but I might be missing something, so I Cc'ed Juan :>
>> 
>> FWIW, I didn't spot anything problematic either.
>> 
>> I've ran this through my migration compatibility series [1] and it
>> doesn't regress aarch64 migration from/to 8.2. The tests use '-M
>> virt -cpu max', so the cortex-a7 and cortex-a15 are not covered. I don't
>> think we even support migration of anything non-KVM on arm.
>
> it happens we do.
>

Oh, sorry, I didn't mean TCG here. Probably meant to say something like
non-KVM-capable cpus, as in 32-bit. Nevermind.

>> 
>> 1- https://gitlab.com/farosas/qemu/-/jobs/5853599533
>
> yes it depends on the QOM hierarchy and virt seems immune to the changes.
> Good.
>
> However, changing the QOM topology clearly breaks migration compat,

Well, "clearly" is relative =) You've mentioned pseries and aspeed
already, do you have a pointer to one of those cases were we broke
migration so I could take a look?