[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PULL 00/30] ppc-for-5.2 queue 20200904
From: |
Laurent Vivier |
Subject: |
Re: [PULL 00/30] ppc-for-5.2 queue 20200904 |
Date: |
Mon, 7 Sep 2020 18:29:07 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.11.0 |
On 07/09/2020 16:51, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> On Mon, 7 Sep 2020 16:31:24 +0200
> Laurent Vivier <lvivier@redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> On 07/09/2020 16:05, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
>>> Hi Thiago,
>>>
>>> On 9/7/20 3:29 PM, Laurent Vivier wrote:
>>>> On 07/09/2020 04:38, David Gibson wrote:
>>>>> On Sun, Sep 06, 2020 at 04:20:10PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
>
>>>>>> The 'check-tcg' tests for the linux-user static build also
>>>>>> failed on an s390x test:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> CHECK debian-s390x-cross
>>>>>> BUILD s390x-linux-user guest-tests with docker
>>>>>> qemu/debian-s390x-cross
>>>>>> RUN tests for s390x
>>>>>> TEST threadcount on s390x
>>>>>> Unhandled trap: 0x10003
>>>>
>>>> This is EXCP_HALTED (include/exec/cpu-all.h)
>>>>
>>>> The message error comes from cpu_loop() in linux-user/s390x/cpu_loop.c.
>>>>
>>>> The trap can only come from accel/tcg/cpu-exec.c
>>>>
>>>> 679 int cpu_exec(CPUState *cpu)
>>>> 680 {
>>>> ...
>>>> 688 if (cpu_handle_halt(cpu)) {
>>>> 689 return EXCP_HALTED;
>>>> 690 }
>>>>
>>>> and
>>>>
>>>> 428 static inline bool cpu_handle_halt(CPUState *cpu)
>>>> 429 {
>>>> 430 if (cpu->halted) {
>>>> ...
>>>> 441 if (!cpu_has_work(cpu)) {
>>>> 442 return true;
>>>> 443 }
>>>>
>>>> and
>>>>
>>>> 58 static bool s390_cpu_has_work(CPUState *cs)
>>>> 59 {
>>>> 60 S390CPU *cpu = S390_CPU(cs);
>>>> 61
>>>> 62 /* STOPPED cpus can never wake up */
>>>> 63 if (s390_cpu_get_state(cpu) != S390_CPU_STATE_LOAD &&
>>>> 64 s390_cpu_get_state(cpu) != S390_CPU_STATE_OPERATING) {
>>>> 65 return false;
>>>> 66 }
>>>> 67
>>>> 68 if (!(cs->interrupt_request & CPU_INTERRUPT_HARD)) {
>>>> 69 return false;
>>>> 70 }
>>>> 71
>>>> 72 return s390_cpu_has_int(cpu);
>>>> 73 }
>>>>
>>>> and in target/s390x/cpu.h:
>>>>
>>>> 772 #ifndef CONFIG_USER_ONLY
>>>> 773 unsigned int s390_cpu_set_state(uint8_t cpu_state, S390CPU *cpu);
>>>> 774 #else
>>>> 775 static inline unsigned int s390_cpu_set_state(uint8_t cpu_state,
>>>> S390CPU *cpu)
>>>> 776 {
>>>> 777 return 0;
>>>> 778 }
>>>> 779 #endif /* CONFIG_USER_ONLY */
>>>> 780 static inline uint8_t s390_cpu_get_state(S390CPU *cpu)
>>>> 781 {
>>>> 782 return cpu->env.cpu_state;
>>>> 783 }
>>>>
>>>> As cpu_state is never set, perhaps in case of linux-user it should
>>>> always return S390_CPU_STATE_OPERATING?
>
> Possibly, we should not have any state handling for linux-user.
>
I did that, but now 390_cpu_has_work() is false because
CPU_INTERRUPT_HARD is not set in cs->interrupt_request.
I think we should not enter in cpu_loop() with halted set to 1.
Before the patch of this series, s390_cpu_reset() is called twice, and
on the second call, halted is already 0.
With start_powered_off set to true in initfn, on the first reset
"halted" is 0 and on the second it is 1 (because it has been copied from
start_powered_off) and so cpu_loop() starts with halted set to 1 and fails.
Thanks,
Laurent
- [PULL 29/30] spapr, spapr_numa: move lookup-arrays handling to spapr_numa.c, (continued)
- [PULL 29/30] spapr, spapr_numa: move lookup-arrays handling to spapr_numa.c, David Gibson, 2020/09/03
- [PULL 24/30] hw/ppc/ppc4xx_pci: Replace pointless warning by assert(), David Gibson, 2020/09/03
- [PULL 30/30] spapr_numa: move NVLink2 associativity handling to spapr_numa.c, David Gibson, 2020/09/03
- [PULL 27/30] spapr: introduce SpaprMachineState::numa_assoc_array, David Gibson, 2020/09/03
- Re: [PULL 00/30] ppc-for-5.2 queue 20200904, Peter Maydell, 2020/09/06
- Re: [PULL 00/30] ppc-for-5.2 queue 20200904, David Gibson, 2020/09/06
- Re: [PULL 00/30] ppc-for-5.2 queue 20200904, Laurent Vivier, 2020/09/07
- Re: [PULL 00/30] ppc-for-5.2 queue 20200904, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé, 2020/09/07
- Re: [PULL 00/30] ppc-for-5.2 queue 20200904, Laurent Vivier, 2020/09/07
- Re: [PULL 00/30] ppc-for-5.2 queue 20200904, Cornelia Huck, 2020/09/07
- Re: [PULL 00/30] ppc-for-5.2 queue 20200904,
Laurent Vivier <=
- Re: [PULL 00/30] ppc-for-5.2 queue 20200904, Laurent Vivier, 2020/09/07
- Re: [PULL 00/30] ppc-for-5.2 queue 20200904, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé, 2020/09/07
- Re: [PULL 00/30] ppc-for-5.2 queue 20200904, David Gibson, 2020/09/07
- Re: [PULL 00/30] ppc-for-5.2 queue 20200904, Cornelia Huck, 2020/09/08
- Re: [PULL 00/30] ppc-for-5.2 queue 20200904, Thiago Jung Bauermann, 2020/09/08