On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 07:54:37AM +0200, Cédric Le Goater wrote:
> On 09/27/2016 04:35 AM, David Gibson wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 06:11:36PM +0200, Cédric Le Goater wrote:
> >> On 09/23/2016 04:46 AM, David Gibson wrote:
> >>> On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 10:25:59AM +0200, Cédric Le Goater
On Tue, 2016-09-27 at 11:10 +0200, Cédric Le Goater wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > +PowerPCCPU *cpu = POWERPC_CPU(cs);
> > > +CPUPPCState *env = >env;
> > > +
> > > +cpu_synchronize_state(cs);
> > > +env->spr[SPR_HMER] |= hmer_bits;
> > > +
> > > +/* XXX Need a CPU helper to set
On Tue, 2016-09-27 at 11:30 +0200, Cédric Le Goater wrote:
> On 09/27/2016 11:10 AM, Cédric Le Goater wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > +#include
> > > > +
> > > > +static void xscom_complete(uint64_t hmer_bits)
> > > > +{
> > > > +CPUState *cs = current_cpu;
> > >
> > > Hmm.. is
On 09/27/2016 11:10 AM, Cédric Le Goater wrote:
>>> +#include
>>> +
>>> +static void xscom_complete(uint64_t hmer_bits)
>>> +{
>>> +CPUState *cs = current_cpu;
>>
>> Hmm.. is current_cpu a safe thing to use in the case of KVM or MTTCG?
>
> yes, as we are running under cpu_exec when doing
>> +#include
>> +
>> +static void xscom_complete(uint64_t hmer_bits)
>> +{
>> +CPUState *cs = current_cpu;
>
> Hmm.. is current_cpu a safe thing to use in the case of KVM or MTTCG?
yes, as we are running under cpu_exec when doing this call.
>> +PowerPCCPU *cpu = POWERPC_CPU(cs);
>> +
On 09/27/2016 08:10 AM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> On Tue, 2016-09-27 at 07:54 +0200, Cédric Le Goater wrote:
>>
>>> but I guess if you have the decoding of those "core" registers
>>> here as well, then that doesn't make so much sense.
>
> Those core registers may well change with P9, we
On Tue, 2016-09-27 at 07:54 +0200, Cédric Le Goater wrote:
>
> > but I guess if you have the decoding of those "core" registers
> > here as well, then that doesn't make so much sense.
Those core registers may well change with P9, we havne't looked closely
yet...
> yes and there is also the
On 09/27/2016 04:35 AM, David Gibson wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 06:11:36PM +0200, Cédric Le Goater wrote:
>> On 09/23/2016 04:46 AM, David Gibson wrote:
>>> On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 10:25:59AM +0200, Cédric Le Goater wrote:
>> @@ -493,6 +525,8 @@ static void
On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 06:11:36PM +0200, Cédric Le Goater wrote:
> On 09/23/2016 04:46 AM, David Gibson wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 10:25:59AM +0200, Cédric Le Goater wrote:
> @@ -493,6 +525,8 @@ static void pnv_chip_power9_class_init(ObjectClass
> *klass, void *data)
>
On 09/23/2016 04:46 AM, David Gibson wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 10:25:59AM +0200, Cédric Le Goater wrote:
@@ -493,6 +525,8 @@ static void pnv_chip_power9_class_init(ObjectClass
*klass, void *data)
k->chip_cfam_id = 0x100d10498000ull; /* P9 Nimbus DD1.0 */
On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 10:25:59AM +0200, Cédric Le Goater wrote:
> >> @@ -493,6 +525,8 @@ static void pnv_chip_power9_class_init(ObjectClass
> >> *klass, void *data)
> >> k->chip_cfam_id = 0x100d10498000ull; /* P9 Nimbus DD1.0 */
> >> k->cores_mask = POWER9_CORE_MASK;
> >>
>> @@ -493,6 +525,8 @@ static void pnv_chip_power9_class_init(ObjectClass
>> *klass, void *data)
>> k->chip_cfam_id = 0x100d10498000ull; /* P9 Nimbus DD1.0 */
>> k->cores_mask = POWER9_CORE_MASK;
>> k->core_pir = pnv_chip_core_pir_p9;
>> +k->xscom_addr =
On Wed, 2016-09-21 at 15:56 +1000, David Gibson wrote:
>
> Yes, I think that's the way to go.
>
> That also means on P9 you can potentially just map the scom address
> space directly into address_space_memory, instead of requiring a
> redispatcher to do the address mangling.
No. You still need
On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 02:45:57PM +0200, Cédric Le Goater wrote:
> On a real POWER8 system, the Pervasive Interconnect Bus (PIB) serves
> as a backbone to connect different units of the system. The host
> firmware connects to the PIB through a bridge unit, the
> Alter-Display-Unit (ADU), which
On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 08:11:45AM +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> On Thu, 2016-09-15 at 14:45 +0200, Cédric Le Goater wrote:
> > - The PCB translation is too much of a constraint for a specific
> > XSCOM address space, unless someone can explain me how to address 8
> > bytes at
On Thu, 2016-09-15 at 14:45 +0200, Cédric Le Goater wrote:
> - The PCB translation is too much of a constraint for a specific
> XSCOM address space, unless someone can explain me how to address 8
> bytes at 0xb0021 and another 8 different bytes at 0xb0022. I don't
> think the address
On a real POWER8 system, the Pervasive Interconnect Bus (PIB) serves
as a backbone to connect different units of the system. The host
firmware connects to the PIB through a bridge unit, the
Alter-Display-Unit (ADU), which gives him access to all the chiplets
on the PCB network (Pervasive Connect
17 matches
Mail list logo
