virCPUData and struct ppc64_model structures contained a pointer to
virCPUppc64Data, which was not very nice since the real data were
accessible by yet another level of pointers from virCPUppc64Data.
Signed-off-by: Jiri Denemark <jdenemar@redhat.com>
virCPUData, virCPUx86Feature, and virCPUx86Model all contained a pointer
to virCPUx86Data, which was not very nice since the real CPUID data were
accessible by yet another pointer from virCPUx86Data. Moreover, using
virCPUx86Data directly will make static definitions of internal CPU
features a bit easier.
Signed-off-by: Jiri Denemark <jdenemar@redhat.com>
CPUID instruction normally takes its parameter from EAX, but sometimes
ECX is used as an additional parameter. Let's rename 'function' to
'eax_in' in preparation for adding 'ecx_in'.
Signed-off-by: Jiri Denemark <jdenemar@redhat.com>
A CPU data XML file already contains the architecture, let the parser
use it to detect which CPU driver should be used to parse the rest of
the file.
Signed-off-by: Jiri Denemark <jdenemar@redhat.com>
When computing CPU data for a given guest CPU we should set CPUID vendor
bits appropriately so that we don't lose the vendor when transforming
CPU data back to XML description.
Signed-off-by: Jiri Denemark <jdenemar@redhat.com>
cpu/cpu_ppc64.c: In function 'ppc64Compute':
cpu/cpu_ppc64.c:620:27: error: potential null pointer dereference [-Werror=null-dereference]
if (STRNEQ(guest_model->name, host_model->name)) {
~~~~~~~~~~~^~~
cpu/cpu_ppc64.c:620:9: note: in expansion of macro 'STRNEQ'
if (STRNEQ(guest_model->name, host_model->name)) {
^~~~~~
cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
Signed-off-by: Michal Privoznik <mprivozn@redhat.com>
All callers of cpuGetModels expect @models to be NULL-terminated. Once
both x86GetModels and ppc64GetModels were fixed to meet this
expectation, we can explicitly document it.
Signed-off-by: Jiri Denemark <jdenemar@redhat.com>
The architecture specific loaders are now called with a list of all
elements of a given type (rather than a single element at a time). This
avoids the need to reallocate the arrays in CPU maps for each element.
Signed-off-by: Jiri Denemark <jdenemar@redhat.com>
There's no reason for keeping the models in a linked list. Especially
when we know upfront the total number of models we are loading.
As a nice side effect, this fixes ppc64GetModels to always return a
NULL-terminated list of models.
Signed-off-by: Jiri Denemark <jdenemar@redhat.com>
There's no reason for keeping the vendors in a linked list. Especially
when we know upfront the total number of models we are loading.
Signed-off-by: Jiri Denemark <jdenemar@redhat.com>
There's no reason for keeping the features in a linked list. Especially
when we know upfront the total number of features we are loading.
Signed-off-by: Jiri Denemark <jdenemar@redhat.com>
There's no reason for keeping the vendors in a linked list. Especially
when we know upfront the total number of models we are loading.
Signed-off-by: Jiri Denemark <jdenemar@redhat.com>
There's no reason for keeping the models in a linked list. Especially
when we know upfront the total number of models we are loading.
As a nice side effect, this fixes x86GetModels to always return a
NULL-terminated list of models.
Signed-off-by: Jiri Denemark <jdenemar@redhat.com>
When searching for the best CPU model for CPUID data we can easily
ignore models with non-matching vendor before spending time on CPUID
data to virCPUDef conversion.
Signed-off-by: Jiri Denemark <jdenemar@redhat.com>
Splitting the comparison into a separate function makes the code cleaner
and easier to update in the future.
Signed-off-by: Jiri Denemark <jdenemar@redhat.com>
Usage of this keyword in front of function declaration that is exported via a
header file is unnecessary, since internally, this has been the default for most
compilers for quite some time.
Signed-off-by: Erik Skultety <eskultet@redhat.com>
Commit 7068b56c introduced several hyperv features. Not all hyperv
features are supported by old enough kernels and we shouldn't allow to
start a guest if kernel doesn't support any of the hyperv feature.
There is one exception, for backward compatibility we cannot error out
if one of the RELAXED, VAPIC or SPINLOCKS isn't supported, for the same
reason we ignore invtsc, to not break restoring saved domains with older
libvirt.
Signed-off-by: Pavel Hrdina <phrdina@redhat.com>
While the check is appropriate for eg. the x86 and generic drivers,
there are some valid ppc64 guest configurations where the CPU
model is supposed to be NULL.
Moving this check from the generic code to the drivers makes it
possible to accomodate both use cases.
Resolves: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1251927
Not all combinations of host CPU models and compatibility modes
are valid, so we need to make sure we don't try to do something
that QEMU will reject.
Moreover, we need to apply a different logic to guests using
host-model and host-passthrough modes when testing them for host
compatibility.
Resolves: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1251927
If a guest CPU is defined using
<cpu mode='host-model'/>
the <model> sub-element will contain the compatibility mode to use.
That means we can't just copy the host CPU model on cpuUpdate(),
otherwise we'll overwrite that information and migration of such
guests will fail.
Resolves: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1251927
Unlike what happens on x86, on ppc64 you can't mix and match CPU
features to obtain the guest CPU you want regardless of the host
CPU, so the concept of model fallback doesn't apply.
Make sure CPU definitions emitted by the driver, eg. as output of
the cpuBaseline() and cpuUpdate() calls, reflect this fact.
All previously recognized CPU models (POWER7_v2.1, POWER7_v2.3,
POWER7+_v2.1 and POWER8_v1.0) are internally converted to the
corrisponding generation name so that existing guests don't stop
working.
Use multiple PVRs per CPU model to reduce the number of models we
need to keep track of.
Remove specific CPU models (eg. POWER7+_v2.1): the corresponding
generic CPU model (eg. POWER7) should be used instead to ensure
the guest can be booted on any compatible host.
Get rid of all the entries that did not match any of the CPU
models supported by QEMU, like power8 and power8e.
Resolves: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1250977
This will allow us to perform PVR matching more broadly, eg. consider
both POWER8 and POWER8E CPUs to be the same even though they have
different PVR values.
This ensures comparison of two CPU definitions will be consistent
regardless of the fact that it is performed using cpuCompare() or
cpuGuestData(). The x86 driver uses the same exact code.
Limitations of the POWER architecture mean that you can't run
eg. a POWER7 guest on a POWER8 host when using KVM. This applies
to all guests, not just those using VIR_CPU_MATCH_STRICT in the
CPU definition; in fact, exact and strict CPU matching are
basically the same on ppc64.
This means, of course, that hosts using different CPUs have to be
considered incompatible as well.
Change ppc64Compute(), called by cpuGuestData(), to reflect this
fact and update test cases accordingly.
Resolves: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1250977
ppc64Compute(), called by cpuNodeData(), is used not only to retrieve
the driver-specific data associated to a guest CPU definition, but
also to check whether said guest CPU is compatible with the host CPU.
If the user is not interested in the CPU data, it's perfectly fine
to pass a NULL pointer instead of a return location, and the
compatibility data returned should not be affected by this. One of
the checks, specifically the one on CPU model name, was however
only performed if the return location was non-NULL.
