On Fri, Dec 17, 2021 at 03:29:13PM +0100, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 17 2021, Daniel P. Berrangé <berra...@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Dec 17, 2021 at 09:13:55AM +0100, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> >> On Wed, Dec 08 2021, Cornelia Huck <coh...@redhat.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Add 7.0 machine types for arm/i440fx/q35/s390x/spapr.
> >> >
> >> > Signed-off-by: Cornelia Huck <coh...@redhat.com>
> >> > ---
> >> > hw/arm/virt.c | 9 ++++++++-
> >> > hw/core/machine.c | 3 +++
> >> > hw/i386/pc.c | 3 +++
> >> > hw/i386/pc_piix.c | 14 +++++++++++++-
> >> > hw/i386/pc_q35.c | 13 ++++++++++++-
> >> > hw/ppc/spapr.c | 15 +++++++++++++--
> >> > hw/s390x/s390-virtio-ccw.c | 14 +++++++++++++-
> >> > include/hw/boards.h | 3 +++
> >> > include/hw/i386/pc.h | 3 +++
> >> > 9 files changed, 71 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> >> >
> >>
> >
> >
> >> > diff --git a/hw/i386/pc_piix.c b/hw/i386/pc_piix.c
> >> > index 223dd3e05d15..b03026bf0648 100644
> >> > --- a/hw/i386/pc_piix.c
> >> > +++ b/hw/i386/pc_piix.c
> >> > @@ -413,7 +413,7 @@ static void pc_i440fx_machine_options(MachineClass
> >> > *m)
> >> > machine_class_allow_dynamic_sysbus_dev(m, TYPE_VMBUS_BRIDGE);
> >> > }
> >> >
> >> > -static void pc_i440fx_6_2_machine_options(MachineClass *m)
> >> > +static void pc_i440fx_7_0_machine_options(MachineClass *m)
> >> > {
> >> > PCMachineClass *pcmc = PC_MACHINE_CLASS(m);
> >> > pc_i440fx_machine_options(m);
> >> > @@ -422,6 +422,18 @@ static void
> >> > pc_i440fx_6_2_machine_options(MachineClass *m)
> >> > pcmc->default_cpu_version = 1;
> >> > }
> >> >
> >> > +DEFINE_I440FX_MACHINE(v7_0, "pc-i440fx-7.0", NULL,
> >> > + pc_i440fx_7_0_machine_options);
> >> > +
> >> > +static void pc_i440fx_6_2_machine_options(MachineClass *m)
> >> > +{
> >> > + pc_i440fx_machine_options(m);
> >
> > Needs to be pc_i440fx_7_0_machine_options()
> >
> >> > + m->alias = NULL;
> >> > + m->is_default = false;
> >> > + compat_props_add(m->compat_props, hw_compat_6_2, hw_compat_6_2_len);
> >> > + compat_props_add(m->compat_props, pc_compat_6_2, pc_compat_6_2_len);
> >> > +}
> >> > +
> >> > DEFINE_I440FX_MACHINE(v6_2, "pc-i440fx-6.2", NULL,
> >> > pc_i440fx_6_2_machine_options);
> >> >
> >> > diff --git a/hw/i386/pc_q35.c b/hw/i386/pc_q35.c
> >> > index e1e100316d93..6b66eb16bb64 100644
> >> > --- a/hw/i386/pc_q35.c
> >> > +++ b/hw/i386/pc_q35.c
> >> > @@ -360,7 +360,7 @@ static void pc_q35_machine_options(MachineClass *m)
> >> > m->max_cpus = 288;
> >> > }
> >> >
> >> > -static void pc_q35_6_2_machine_options(MachineClass *m)
> >> > +static void pc_q35_7_0_machine_options(MachineClass *m)
> >> > {
> >> > PCMachineClass *pcmc = PC_MACHINE_CLASS(m);
> >> > pc_q35_machine_options(m);
> >> > @@ -368,6 +368,17 @@ static void pc_q35_6_2_machine_options(MachineClass
> >> > *m)
> >> > pcmc->default_cpu_version = 1;
> >> > }
> >> >
> >> > +DEFINE_Q35_MACHINE(v7_0, "pc-q35-7.0", NULL,
> >> > + pc_q35_7_0_machine_options);
> >> > +
> >> > +static void pc_q35_6_2_machine_options(MachineClass *m)
> >> > +{
> >> > + pc_q35_machine_options(m);
> >
> > Needs to be pc_q35_7_0_machine_options()
> >
> >> > + m->alias = NULL;
> >> > + compat_props_add(m->compat_props, hw_compat_6_2, hw_compat_6_2_len);
> >> > + compat_props_add(m->compat_props, pc_compat_6_2, pc_compat_6_2_len);
> >> > +}
> >> > +
> >> > DEFINE_Q35_MACHINE(v6_2, "pc-q35-6.2", NULL,
> >> > pc_q35_6_2_machine_options);
> >> >
> >>
> >> So, this apparently causes some problems with one of the avocado tests:
> >>
> >> 162-tests/avocado/x86_cpu_model_versions.py:X86CPUModelAliases.test_4_1_alias
> >> -> AssertionError: None != 'Cascadelake-Server-v1' : Cascadelake-Server
> >> must be an alias of Cascadelake-Server-v1
> >>
> >> (full output at https://gitlab.com/qemu-project/qemu/-/jobs/1893456217)
> >>
> >> I have looked at the patch again and do not see what might be wrong (has
> >> something changed with the cpu model versioning recently?)
> >>
> >> Does anyone else (especially the x86 folks) have an idea?
> >
> > AFAICT, just a typo in chaining up the methods I've pointed out inline.
>
> Duh, indeed. Thanks for spotting this.
>
> Will send a v2.
>
>
/me wonders if this patch could be generated with a "simple" script in
order to avoid typos and/or forgetting lines. It seems like all
architectures have pretty consistent patterns.
Thanks,
drew
