From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 17820C3ABBF for ; Wed, 7 May 2025 12:44:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1uCe7Z-0003Gd-TR; Wed, 07 May 2025 08:43:35 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1uCe7X-0003F7-Hd; Wed, 07 May 2025 08:43:31 -0400 Received: from mgamail.intel.com ([192.198.163.8]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1uCe7T-0005Nl-DC; Wed, 07 May 2025 08:43:31 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1746621807; x=1778157807; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=RLal0QSny7MhpWsbU2LrAZCM4jg0TFU5MJHApMM6pvg=; b=KBrNkpVdDEarFcA4Fy3iSx4DROicFfrnXZJICIWQ6S419ATqUlgNIk3w i+3ykh47M7EZ6rPFAlb+ucJUTEFXgiD9ODpA1TU1tsUYkyw9ZIv+WlR6O bUPUukzBvZobC64GAKXuy9ektE6VRmAHescNCaqs5GHynQwYvWszQAh8A 8quiF3ly8zrwyApls6IEPUZegLKSf5r6i/XLQz9XKvg7calm4kqrozZ/Z k9TytwIHjZfqAEJqEmedunOxM6qwC3WOGwWVEbOOchbEwtIS8gmCuxgdI 0Ry8sz2EWDSpKKlpAZ24rcjqIEIh1kO7N5vFeg6dRS9OfrJaLJArKXv6b A==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: 6rF1yyIaSCqrDOVN4xs6Fg== X-CSE-MsgGUID: qsPvOmkIRcK1vfepGC2pmQ== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6700,10204,11426"; a="65878854" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.15,269,1739865600"; d="scan'208";a="65878854" Received: from fmviesa006.fm.intel.com ([10.60.135.146]) by fmvoesa102.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 07 May 2025 05:43:19 -0700 X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: 21aa5MlvQbiMx9Vc/SVJDA== X-CSE-MsgGUID: +vGheIrIRHO3TxziUlV6LQ== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.15,269,1739865600"; d="scan'208";a="135915271" Received: from liuzhao-optiplex-7080.sh.intel.com (HELO localhost) ([10.239.160.39]) by fmviesa006.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 07 May 2025 05:43:17 -0700 Date: Wed, 7 May 2025 21:04:18 +0800 From: Zhao Liu To: Michael Tokarev Cc: Ewan Hai , pbonzini@redhat.com, xiaoyao.li@intel.com, ewanhai@zhaoxin.com, cobechen@zhaoxin.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, qemu-stable Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] target/i386: Fix model number of Zhaoxin YongFeng vCPU template Message-ID: References: <20250415024545.517897-1-ewanhai-oc@zhaoxin.com> <8159d6e6-7de6-47ed-92ca-a6ec2721cf10@tls.msk.ru> <970df0f3-f26f-4f3c-8259-22f8508e57e8@zhaoxin.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Received-SPF: pass client-ip=192.198.163.8; envelope-from=zhao1.liu@intel.com; helo=mgamail.intel.com X-Spam_score_int: -57 X-Spam_score: -5.8 X-Spam_bar: ----- X-Spam_report: (-5.8 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-1.414, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_CERTIFIED_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org On Wed, May 07, 2025 at 02:30:50PM +0300, Michael Tokarev wrote: > Date: Wed, 7 May 2025 14:30:50 +0300 > From: Michael Tokarev > Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] target/i386: Fix model number of Zhaoxin YongFeng > vCPU template > > On 25.04.2025 14:14, Ewan Hai wrote: > > On 4/24/25 3:25 PM, Michael Tokarev wrote: > > > > > > On 15.04.2025 05:45, Ewan Hai wrote: > > > > The model number was mistakenly set to 0x0b (11) in commit ff04bc1ac4. > > > > The correct value is 0x5b. This mistake occurred because the extended > > > > model bits in cpuid[eax=0x1].eax were overlooked, and only the base > > > > model was used. > > > > > > > > Using the wrong model number can affect guest behavior. One known issue > > > > is that vPMU (which relies on the model number) may fail to operate > > > > correctly. > > > > > > > > This patch corrects the model field by introducing a new vCPU version. > > > > > > > > Additionally, it adds a "Preferred CPU models for Zhaoxin x86 hosts" > > > > section in docs/system/cpu-models-x86.rst.inc to recommend the > > > > appropriate Zhaoxin CPU model(s). > > > > > > > > Fixes: ff04bc1ac4 ("target/i386: Introduce Zhaoxin Yongfeng CPU model") > > > > Signed-off-by: Ewan Hai > > > > Reviewed-by: Zhao Liu > > > > > > Is it a qemu-stable material (for 10.0.x)? > > > > > > I'm picking this one up, please let me know if I should not. > > > > I'm not sure if this should go into qemu-stable. Maybe Paolo Bonzini or > > Zhao can answer? > > Ping? Paolo, Zhao, - can you comment please? Sorry for late. Though I didn't find the similar case, without this patch, the original model can't support vPMU function correctly. Therefore I think it makes sense to include this patch into stable QEMU, so that the Zhaoxin user could have a normal CPU model. Thanks, Zhao