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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-15.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER,INCLUDES_PATCH, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9571EC11F65 for ; Wed, 30 Jun 2021 16:07:07 +0000 (UTC) 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 mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0ABB66141A for ; Wed, 30 Jun 2021 16:07:07 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 0ABB66141A Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=de.ibm.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Received: from localhost ([::1]:46628 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lycjy-0000L3-3J for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Wed, 30 Jun 2021 12:07:06 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:42426) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lycaN-0005I0-PW; Wed, 30 Jun 2021 11:57:12 -0400 Received: from mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.158.5]:57872) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lycaE-0003QR-Fq; Wed, 30 Jun 2021 11:57:11 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098421.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.43/8.16.0.43) with SMTP id 15UFYECs028753; Wed, 30 Jun 2021 11:57:00 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ibm.com; h=subject : to : cc : references : from : message-id : date : mime-version : in-reply-to : content-type : content-transfer-encoding; s=pp1; bh=c2NDw/FVBNdLtH9gj29r0/Rnkhhd5bMgPQB5Swz2Ayo=; b=eON7JTHNq6Vwf0OKaU2PSp0vfkviy/YxEW1E6Pt/ZTWD8Qoera9V8DG+UfQb1RcNDUuG 4TFBwT1cjV7nIo6t5C29d+mtI0U7seWG+9Cb3s9I8vDDVkjp7lKa8AgpQ/gt54LWFRGi PuaTc26g3rQhW4AGE2YDsARg/pjcldcSBuTS0nWSNAwEmLiIQEGsBqDb4AwmqQTsO6YF X23lN4feWrC2nXLnFw2/dA3kw9+4CSXXOECaNhGqyFTVa+8rndQrsgOhAmpuOo2VGUK7 9BGjrCPJW82Aw6KeqCiDC6Tpp8S8ml7Hw6dnkGUyJtCRxAI9VKPcDIvbBYDiCSqbky48 lQ== Received: from pps.reinject (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 39gtfstr3c-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 30 Jun 2021 11:56:59 -0400 Received: from m0098421.ppops.net (m0098421.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by pps.reinject (8.16.0.43/8.16.0.43) with SMTP id 15UFYenq030840; Wed, 30 Jun 2021 11:56:59 -0400 Received: from ppma04fra.de.ibm.com (6a.4a.5195.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [149.81.74.106]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 39gtfstr2y-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 30 Jun 2021 11:56:59 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (ppma04fra.de.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma04fra.de.ibm.com (8.16.1.2/8.16.1.2) with SMTP id 15UFsNKP016386; Wed, 30 Jun 2021 15:56:57 GMT Received: from b06avi18878370.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (b06avi18878370.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.26.194]) by ppma04fra.de.ibm.com with ESMTP id 39duv8gyt6-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 30 Jun 2021 15:56:57 +0000 Received: from d06av23.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06av23.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.105.59]) by b06avi18878370.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 15UFtF6G25362718 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 30 Jun 2021 15:55:15 GMT Received: from d06av23.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B285A4078; Wed, 30 Jun 2021 15:56:54 +0000 (GMT) Received: from d06av23.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id C570DA4040; Wed, 30 Jun 2021 15:56:53 +0000 (GMT) Received: from oc7455500831.ibm.com (unknown [9.171.84.59]) by d06av23.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Wed, 30 Jun 2021 15:56:53 +0000 (GMT) Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] s390x/cpumodel: add 3931 and 3932 To: Cornelia Huck , David Hildenbrand References: <20210622201923.150205-1-borntraeger@de.ibm.com> <20210622201923.150205-2-borntraeger@de.ibm.com> <7cd6fb75-521b-e970-4f25-b23722765bf9@de.ibm.com> <8735szl66j.fsf@redhat.com> From: Christian Borntraeger Message-ID: Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2021 17:56:53 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.11.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <8735szl66j.fsf@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: kFhRJN4uZRtCtmlpYmrxJHTCIA3L41j- X-Proofpoint-GUID: 8gvR9NVj2Qihr2zdLzqm8EDQfoIChbQ9 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.391, 18.0.790 definitions=2021-06-30_06:2021-06-29, 2021-06-30 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 spamscore=0 malwarescore=0 priorityscore=1501 impostorscore=0 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 phishscore=0 clxscore=1015 suspectscore=0 mlxscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2104190000 definitions=main-2106300092 Received-SPF: pass client-ip=148.163.158.5; envelope-from=borntraeger@de.ibm.com; helo=mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com X-Spam_score_int: -19 X-Spam_score: -2.0 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.0 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-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: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Thomas Huth , Janosch Frank , Richard Henderson , qemu-devel , Halil Pasic , qemu-s390x Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" On 30.06.21 17:32, Cornelia Huck wrote: > On Wed, Jun 30 2021, Christian Borntraeger wrote: > >> On 30.06.21 15:32, David Hildenbrand wrote: >>> On 22.06.21 22:19, Christian Borntraeger wrote: >>>> This defines 5 new facilities and the new 3931 and 3932 machines. >>>> As before the name is not yet known and we do use gen16a and gen16b. >>>> The new features are part of the full model. >>>> >>>> The default model is still empty (same as z15) and will be added >>>> in a separate patch at a later point in time. >>>> >>>> Also add the dependencies of new facilities and as a fix for z15 add >>>> a dependency from S390_FEAT_VECTOR_PACKED_DECIMAL_ENH to >>>> S390_VECTOR_PACKED_DECIMAL. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Christian Borntraeger >>>> --- >>>>   target/s390x/cpu_features_def.h.inc |  5 +++++ >>>>   target/s390x/cpu_models.c           |  6 ++++++ >>>>   target/s390x/gen-features.c         | 14 ++++++++++++++ >>>>   3 files changed, 25 insertions(+) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/target/s390x/cpu_features_def.h.inc b/target/s390x/cpu_features_def.h.inc >>>> index 7db3449e0434..c71caee74411 100644 >>>> --- a/target/s390x/cpu_features_def.h.inc >>>> +++ b/target/s390x/cpu_features_def.h.inc >>>> @@ -109,6 +109,11 @@ DEF_FEAT(VECTOR_PACKED_DECIMAL_ENH, "vxpdeh", STFL, 152, "Vector-Packed-Decimal- >>>>   DEF_FEAT(MSA_EXT_9, "msa9-base", STFL, 155, "Message-security-assist-extension-9 facility (excluding subfunctions)") >>>>   DEF_FEAT(ETOKEN, "etoken", STFL, 156, "Etoken facility") >>>>   DEF_FEAT(UNPACK, "unpack", STFL, 161, "Unpack facility") >>>> +DEF_FEAT(NNPA, "nnpa", STFL, 165, "NNPA facility") >>>> +DEF_FEAT(VECTOR_PACKED_DECIMAL_ENH2, "vxpdeh2", STFL, 192, "Vector-Packed-Decimal-Enhancement facility 2") >>>> +DEF_FEAT(BEAR, "bear", STFL, 193, "BEAR-enhancement facility") >>> >>> Usually we use "eh" for enhancement. Which would result in "beareh" or alternatively "beh". But maybe the "enhancement" part is not actually an enhancement, but instead this facility is more like the etoken or unpack facility ... >> >> There was no bear facility (I think it was part of PER3). >> beareh or beh would be fine with me. >> >>> >>>> +DEF_FEAT(RDP, "rdp", STFL, 194, "Reset-DAT-protection facility") >>>> +DEF_FEAT(ACTIVITY, "activity", STFL, 196, "Processor-Activity-Instrumentation facility") >>> >>> Would "pai" be a more appropriate feature name? >> >> pai would be ok for me as well. >> >> Conny, do you want to replace "activity" with "pai" and "bear" with "beareh" in your tree? > > I can certainly edit this to a naming everyone agrees with (no strong > opinions from my side). Lets pick "pai" and the choose among "beareh" and "beh"