On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 11:56:04AM +0100, Andreas Färber wrote: > Am 17.03.2015 um 09:39 schrieb Bharata B Rao: > > On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 07:56:41AM +0100, Alexander Graf wrote: > >> > >> > >> On 13.03.15 12:56, Bharata B Rao wrote: > >>> From: Bharata B Rao <bharata....@gmail.com> > >>> > >>> Currently CPUState.cpu_index is monotonically increasing and a newly > >>> created CPU always gets the next higher index. The next available > >>> index is calculated by counting the existing number of CPUs. This is > >>> fine as long as we only add CPUs, but there are architectures which > >>> are starting to support CPU removal too. For an architecture like PowerPC > >>> which derives its CPU identifier (device tree ID) from cpu_index, the > >>> existing logic of generating cpu_index values causes problems. > >>> > >>> With the currently proposed method of handling vCPU removal by parking > >>> the vCPU fd in QEMU > >>> (Ref: http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2015-02/msg02604.html), > >>> generating cpu_index this way will not work for PowerPC. > >>> > >>> This patch changes the way cpu_index is handed out by maintaining > >>> a bit map of the CPUs that tracks both addition and removal of CPUs. > >>> > >>> I am not sure if this is the right and an acceptable approach. The > >>> alternative is to do something similar for PowerPC alone and not > >>> depend on cpu_index. > >>> > >>> I have tested this with out-of-the-tree patches for CPU hot plug and > >>> removal on x86 and sPAPR PowerPC. > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Bharata B Rao <bhar...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > >>> --- > >>> exec.c | 39 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------- > >>> include/exec/exec-all.h | 1 + > >>> target-alpha/cpu.c | 6 ++++++ > >>> target-arm/cpu.c | 1 + > >>> target-cris/cpu.c | 6 ++++++ > >>> target-i386/cpu.c | 6 ++++++ > >>> target-lm32/cpu.c | 6 ++++++ > >>> target-m68k/cpu.c | 6 ++++++ > >>> target-microblaze/cpu.c | 6 ++++++ > >>> target-mips/cpu.c | 6 ++++++ > >>> target-moxie/cpu.c | 6 ++++++ > >>> target-openrisc/cpu.c | 6 ++++++ > >>> target-ppc/translate_init.c | 6 ++++++ > >>> target-s390x/cpu.c | 1 + > >>> target-sh4/cpu.c | 6 ++++++ > >>> target-sparc/cpu.c | 1 + > >>> target-tricore/cpu.c | 5 +++++ > >>> target-unicore32/cpu.c | 6 ++++++ > >>> target-xtensa/cpu.c | 6 ++++++ > >>> 19 files changed, 116 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) > >>> > >>> diff --git a/exec.c b/exec.c > >>> index e97071a..7760f2d 100644 > >>> --- a/exec.c > >>> +++ b/exec.c > >>> @@ -530,21 +530,40 @@ void tcg_cpu_address_space_init(CPUState *cpu, > >>> AddressSpace *as) > >>> } > >>> #endif > >>> > >>> +static DECLARE_BITMAP(cpu_index_map, MAX_CPUMASK_BITS); > >>> + > >>> +#ifdef CONFIG_USER_ONLY > >>> +int max_cpus = 1; /* TODO: Check if this is correct ? */ > >>> +#endif > >>> + > >>> +static int cpu_get_free_index(void) > >>> +{ > >>> + int cpu = find_first_zero_bit(cpu_index_map, max_cpus); > >>> + > >>> + if (cpu == max_cpus) { > >>> + fprintf(stderr, "WARNING: qemu: Trying to use more " > >>> + "CPUs than allowed max of %d\n", max_cpus); > >>> + return max_cpus; > >>> + } else { > >>> + bitmap_set(cpu_index_map, cpu, 1); > >>> + return cpu; > >>> + } > >>> +} > >>> + > >>> +void cpu_exec_exit(CPUState *cpu) > >>> +{ > >>> + bitmap_clear(cpu_index_map, cpu->cpu_index, 1); > >>> +} > >>> + > >>> void cpu_exec_init(CPUArchState *env) > >>> { > >>> CPUState *cpu = ENV_GET_CPU(env); > >>> CPUClass *cc = CPU_GET_CLASS(cpu); > >>> - CPUState *some_cpu; > >>> - int cpu_index; > >>> > >>> #if defined(CONFIG_USER_ONLY) > >>> cpu_list_lock(); > >>> #endif > >>> - cpu_index = 0; > >>> - CPU_FOREACH(some_cpu) { > >>> - cpu_index++; > >>> - } > >>> - cpu->cpu_index = cpu_index; > >>> + cpu->cpu_index = cpu_get_free_index(); > >>> cpu->numa_node = 0; > >>> QTAILQ_INIT(&cpu->breakpoints); > >>> QTAILQ_INIT(&cpu->watchpoints); > >>> @@ -558,16 +577,16 @@ void cpu_exec_init(CPUArchState *env) > >>> cpu_list_unlock(); > >>> #endif > >>> if (qdev_get_vmsd(DEVICE(cpu)) == NULL) { > >>> - vmstate_register(NULL, cpu_index, &vmstate_cpu_common, cpu); > >>> + vmstate_register(NULL, cpu->cpu_index, &vmstate_cpu_common, cpu); > >>> } > >>> #if defined(CPU_SAVE_VERSION) && !defined(CONFIG_USER_ONLY) > >>> - register_savevm(NULL, "cpu", cpu_index, CPU_SAVE_VERSION, > >>> + register_savevm(NULL, "cpu", cpu->cpu_index, CPU_SAVE_VERSION, > >>> cpu_save, cpu_load, env); > >>> assert(cc->vmsd == NULL); > >>> assert(qdev_get_vmsd(DEVICE(cpu)) == NULL); > >>> #endif > >>> if (cc->vmsd != NULL) { > >>> - vmstate_register(NULL, cpu_index, cc->vmsd, cpu); > >>> + vmstate_register(NULL, cpu->cpu_index, cc->vmsd, cpu); > >>> } > >>> } > >>> > >>> diff --git a/include/exec/exec-all.h b/include/exec/exec-all.h > >>> index 8eb0db3..95fbba0 100644 > >>> --- a/include/exec/exec-all.h > >>> +++ b/include/exec/exec-all.h > >>> @@ -89,6 +89,7 @@ TranslationBlock *tb_gen_code(CPUState *cpu, > >>> target_ulong pc, target_ulong cs_base, int > >>> flags, > >>> int cflags); > >>> void cpu_exec_init(CPUArchState *env); > >>> +void cpu_exec_exit(CPUState *cpu); > >>> void QEMU_NORETURN cpu_loop_exit(CPUState *cpu); > >>> int page_unprotect(target_ulong address, uintptr_t pc, void *puc); > >>> void tb_invalidate_phys_page_range(tb_page_addr_t start, tb_page_addr_t > >>> end, > >>> diff --git a/target-alpha/cpu.c b/target-alpha/cpu.c > >>> index a98b7d8..7c57165 100644 > >>> --- a/target-alpha/cpu.c > >>> +++ b/target-alpha/cpu.c > >>> @@ -250,6 +250,11 @@ static const TypeInfo ev68_cpu_type_info = { > >>> .parent = TYPE("ev67"), > >>> }; > >>> > >>> +static void alpha_cpu_finalize(Object *obj) > >>> +{ > >>> + cpu_exec_exit(CPU(obj)); > >>> +} > >>> + > >>> static void alpha_cpu_initfn(Object *obj) > >>> { > >>> CPUState *cs = CPU(obj); > >>> @@ -305,6 +310,7 @@ static const TypeInfo alpha_cpu_type_info = { > >>> .parent = TYPE_CPU, > >>> .instance_size = sizeof(AlphaCPU), > >>> .instance_init = alpha_cpu_initfn, > >>> + .instance_finalize = alpha_cpu_finalize, > >> > >> Would it be possible to put this into TYPE_CPU->instance_finalize instead? > > > > Yes possible and that would be much cleaner since I wouldn't have to touch > > all archs. But it will be asymmetric in some sense as cpu_exec_init() is > > called from all individual cpus' instance_init but cpu_exec_exit() will be > > called from parent's (TYPE_CPU) instance_finalize. If that is fine, I shall > > post v2 with this change. > > Could you check: Wasn't there a patch from Fujitsu to move > cpu_exec_init() to generic code? If both were generic, that would be > fine. If that is problematic, I would accept the mismatch as long as it > is "safe". That is, instance_finalize needs to handle any state of the > object,
There is a patch from Zhu to move only vmstate_register related bits from cpu_exec_init to cpu_common_realizefn. http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2015-01/msg01550.html > and I think these two are better suited for realize/unrealize > than instance_init/instance_finalize. And Eduardo has a patch to move cpu_exec_init call from instance_init to realize for target-i386. https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2015-03/msg01056.html So if the preferred way is to call cpu_exec_init from realize, then Eduardo - Can you do this for all archs ? My limited testing shows that it (moving cpu_exec_init from instance_init to realize) works for sPAPR PowerPC too, but not sure about other targets. After there is consensus on the above two patches, I can do the cpu_index to bitmap changes. Regards, Bharata.
