> Check for and propogate errors during s390 cpu creation.
>
> Signed-off-by: Matthew Rosato <mjros...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> ---
> hw/s390x/s390-virtio-ccw.c | 30 +++++++++++++++++++++
> hw/s390x/s390-virtio.c | 2 +-
> hw/s390x/s390-virtio.h | 1 +
> target-s390x/cpu-qom.h | 3 +++
> target-s390x/cpu.c | 65
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
> target-s390x/cpu.h | 1 +
> target-s390x/helper.c | 31 ++++++++++++++++++++--
> 7 files changed, 128 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/hw/s390x/s390-virtio-ccw.c b/hw/s390x/s390-virtio-ccw.c
> index 3090e76..4886dbf 100644
> --- a/hw/s390x/s390-virtio-ccw.c
> +++ b/hw/s390x/s390-virtio-ccw.c
> @@ -112,6 +112,36 @@ void s390_memory_init(ram_addr_t mem_size)
> s390_skeys_init();
> }
>
> +S390CPU *s390_new_cpu(MachineState *machine, int64_t id, Error **errp)
> +{
> + S390CPU *cpu = NULL;
> + Error *local_err = NULL;
Think the naming schema is "err" now.
> +
> + if (id >= max_cpus) {
> + error_setg(errp, "Unable to add CPU: %" PRIi64
> + ", max allowed: %d", id, max_cpus - 1);
> + goto out;
Could we also move this check to the realize function?
> + }
> +
> + cpu = cpu_s390x_create(machine->cpu_model, &local_err);
> + if (local_err != NULL) {
> + goto out;
> + }
> +
> + object_property_set_int(OBJECT(cpu), id, "id", &local_err);
We should add a check in between
if (err) {
goto out;
}
> + object_property_set_bool(OBJECT(cpu), true, "realized", &local_err);
> +
> +out:
> + if (cpu != NULL) {
> + object_unref(OBJECT(cpu));
Is the object_unref() here correct?
I know that we have one reference from VCPU creation. Where does the second one
come from (is it from the hotplug handler? then I'd prefer a comment here :D )
> + }
> + if (local_err) {
> + error_propagate(errp, local_err);
> + cpu = NULL;
> + }
> + return cpu;
> +}
> +
> static void ccw_init(MachineState *machine)
> {
> int ret;
> diff --git a/hw/s390x/s390-virtio.c b/hw/s390x/s390-virtio.c
> index 6bd9803..6f71ab0 100644
> --- a/hw/s390x/s390-virtio.c
> +++ b/hw/s390x/s390-virtio.c
> @@ -118,7 +118,7 @@ void s390_init_cpus(MachineState *machine)
> }
>
> for (i = 0; i < smp_cpus; i++) {
> - cpu_s390x_init(machine->cpu_model);
> + s390_new_cpu(machine, i, &error_fatal);
> }
> }
>
> diff --git a/hw/s390x/s390-virtio.h b/hw/s390x/s390-virtio.h
> index ffd014c..fbcfdb8 100644
> --- a/hw/s390x/s390-virtio.h
> +++ b/hw/s390x/s390-virtio.h
> @@ -29,4 +29,5 @@ void s390_create_virtio_net(BusState *bus, const char
> *name);
> void s390_nmi(NMIState *n, int cpu_index, Error **errp);
> void s390_machine_reset(void);
> void s390_memory_init(ram_addr_t mem_size);
> +S390CPU *s390_new_cpu(MachineState *machine, int64_t id, Error **errp);
> #endif
> diff --git a/target-s390x/cpu-qom.h b/target-s390x/cpu-qom.h
> index 029a44a..1c90933 100644
> --- a/target-s390x/cpu-qom.h
> +++ b/target-s390x/cpu-qom.h
> @@ -47,6 +47,8 @@ typedef struct S390CPUClass {
> CPUClass parent_class;
> /*< public >*/
>
> + int64_t next_cpu_id;
> +
> DeviceRealize parent_realize;
> void (*parent_reset)(CPUState *cpu);
> void (*load_normal)(CPUState *cpu);
> @@ -66,6 +68,7 @@ typedef struct S390CPU {
> /*< public >*/
>
> CPUS390XState env;
> + int64_t id;
> /* needed for live migration */
> void *irqstate;
> uint32_t irqstate_saved_size;
> diff --git a/target-s390x/cpu.c b/target-s390x/cpu.c
> index 8dfd063..ec66ed6 100644
> --- a/target-s390x/cpu.c
> +++ b/target-s390x/cpu.c
> @@ -30,6 +30,7 @@
> #include "qemu/error-report.h"
> #include "hw/hw.h"
> #include "trace.h"
> +#include "qapi/visitor.h"
> #ifndef CONFIG_USER_ONLY
> #include "sysemu/arch_init.h"
> #endif
> @@ -197,11 +198,26 @@ static void s390_cpu_realizefn(DeviceState *dev, Error
> **errp)
> S390CPUClass *scc = S390_CPU_GET_CLASS(dev);
> S390CPU *cpu = S390_CPU(dev);
> CPUS390XState *env = &cpu->env;
> + Error *local_err = NULL;
> +
> + if (cpu->id != scc->next_cpu_id) {
> + error_setg(errp, "Unable to add CPU: %" PRIi64
> + ", The next available id is %" PRIi64, cpu->id,
> + scc->next_cpu_id);
> + return;
> + }
> +
> + cpu_exec_init(cs, &local_err);
> + if (local_err != NULL) {
> + error_propagate(errp, local_err);
> + return;
> + }
> + scc->next_cpu_id = cs->cpu_index + 1;
>
> #if !defined(CONFIG_USER_ONLY)
> qemu_register_reset(s390_cpu_machine_reset_cb, cpu);
> #endif
> - env->cpu_num = cs->cpu_index;
> + env->cpu_num = cpu->id;
> s390_cpu_gdb_init(cs);
> qemu_init_vcpu(cs);
> #if !defined(CONFIG_USER_ONLY)
> @@ -213,6 +229,49 @@ static void s390_cpu_realizefn(DeviceState *dev, Error
> **errp)
> scc->parent_realize(dev, errp);
> }
>
> +static void s390_cpu_get_id(Object *obj, Visitor *v, const char *name,
> + void *opaque, Error **errp)
> +{
> + S390CPU *cpu = S390_CPU(obj);
> + int64_t value = cpu->id;
> +
> + visit_type_int(v, name, &value, errp);
> +}
> +
> +static void s390_cpu_set_id(Object *obj, Visitor *v, const char *name,
> + void *opaque, Error **errp)
> +{
> + S390CPU *cpu = S390_CPU(obj);
> + DeviceState *dev = DEVICE(obj);
> + const int64_t min = 0;
> + const int64_t max = UINT32_MAX;
> + Error *local_err = NULL;
> + int64_t value;
> +
> + if (dev->realized) {
> + error_setg(errp, "Attempt to set property '%s' on '%s' after "
> + "it was realized", name, object_get_typename(obj));
> + return;
> + }
> +
> + visit_type_int(v, name, &value, &local_err);
> + if (local_err) {
> + error_propagate(errp, local_err);
> + return;
> + }
> + if (value < min || value > max) {
> + error_setg(errp, "Property %s.%s doesn't take value %" PRId64
> + " (minimum: %" PRId64 ", maximum: %" PRId64 ")" ,
> + object_get_typename(obj), name, value, min, max);
> + return;
> + }
> + if ((value != cpu->id) && cpu_exists(value)) {
> + error_setg(errp, "CPU with ID %" PRIi64 " exists", value);
> + return;
> + }
> + cpu->id = value;
> +}
Just curious, what about using a simple
object_property_set_int() and doing all the checks in realize() ?
Then we could live without manual getter/setter (and without the realize check).
> +
> static void s390_cpu_initfn(Object *obj)
> {
> CPUState *cs = CPU(obj);
> @@ -226,7 +285,8 @@ static void s390_cpu_initfn(Object *obj)
> cs->env_ptr = env;
> cs->halted = 1;
> cs->exception_index = EXCP_HLT;
> - cpu_exec_init(cs, &error_abort);
> + object_property_add(OBJECT(cpu), "id", "int64_t", s390_cpu_get_id,
> + s390_cpu_set_id, NULL, NULL, NULL);
> #if !defined(CONFIG_USER_ONLY)
> qemu_get_timedate(&tm, 0);
> env->tod_offset = TOD_UNIX_EPOCH +
> @@ -342,6 +402,7 @@ static void s390_cpu_class_init(ObjectClass *oc, void
> *data)
> CPUClass *cc = CPU_CLASS(scc);
> DeviceClass *dc = DEVICE_CLASS(oc);
>
> + scc->next_cpu_id = 0;
> scc->parent_realize = dc->realize;
> dc->realize = s390_cpu_realizefn;
>
> diff --git a/target-s390x/cpu.h b/target-s390x/cpu.h
> index 6ae5699..2c7d6bd 100644
> --- a/target-s390x/cpu.h
> +++ b/target-s390x/cpu.h
> @@ -413,6 +413,7 @@ void trigger_pgm_exception(CPUS390XState *env, uint32_t
> code, uint32_t ilen);
> #endif
>
> S390CPU *cpu_s390x_init(const char *cpu_model);
> +S390CPU *cpu_s390x_create(const char *cpu_model, Error **errp);
> void s390x_translate_init(void);
> int cpu_s390x_exec(CPUState *cpu);
>
> diff --git a/target-s390x/helper.c b/target-s390x/helper.c
> index 838bdd9..e562cb7 100644
> --- a/target-s390x/helper.c
> +++ b/target-s390x/helper.c
> @@ -65,14 +65,41 @@ void s390x_cpu_timer(void *opaque)
> }
> #endif
>
> -S390CPU *cpu_s390x_init(const char *cpu_model)
> +S390CPU *cpu_s390x_create(const char *cpu_model, Error **errp)
> {
> S390CPU *cpu;
>
> cpu = S390_CPU(object_new(TYPE_S390_CPU));
>
> - object_property_set_bool(OBJECT(cpu), true, "realized", NULL);
> + return cpu;
> +}
> +
> +S390CPU *cpu_s390x_init(const char *cpu_model)
> +{
> + Error *error = NULL;
> + S390CPU *cpu;
> + S390CPUClass *scc;
> + int64_t id;
>
> + cpu = cpu_s390x_create(cpu_model, &error);
> + if (error) {
> + goto out;
> + }
> +
> + scc = S390_CPU_GET_CLASS(cpu);
> + id = scc->next_cpu_id;
> +
> + object_property_set_int(OBJECT(cpu), id, "id", &error);
dito
> + object_property_set_bool(OBJECT(cpu), true, "realized", &error);
> +
> + out:
> + if (error) {
> + error_report_err(error);
> + if (cpu != NULL) {
> + object_unref(OBJECT(cpu));
> + cpu = NULL;
> + }
> + }
Can we make both error handling blocks (s390_cpu_add) look alike?
> return cpu;
> }
>
This looks much better to me!
David
