Looks sane on a z14.
Tested-by: Christian Borntraeger <borntrae...@de.ibm.com>
On 02/05/2018 11:29 AM, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> --- a/target/s390x/kvm.c
> +++ b/target/s390x/kvm.c
> @@ -2221,6 +2221,14 @@ void kvm_s390_get_host_cpu_model(S390CPUModel *model,
> Error **errp)
> return;
> }
>
> + /* PTFF subfunctions might be indicated although kernel support missing
> */
> + if (!test_bit(S390_FEAT_MULTIPLE_EPOCH, model->features)) {
> + clear_bit(S390_FEAT_PTFF_QSIE, model->features);
> + clear_bit(S390_FEAT_PTFF_QTOUE, model->features);
> + clear_bit(S390_FEAT_PTFF_STOE, model->features);
> + clear_bit(S390_FEAT_PTFF_STOUE, model->features);
> + }
> +
> /* with cpu model support, CMM is only indicated if really available */
> if (kvm_s390_cmma_available()) {
> set_bit(S390_FEAT_CMM, model->features);
>
Do you also want to add something to check_consistency ?
Right now the following user error
-cpu z14,mepoch=off,mepochptff=on
is accepted.
On the other hand we also have no consistency checks for other subfunctions.
