From patchwork Tue Jul 30 19:23:23 2024 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: Aditya Gupta X-Patchwork-Id: 13747813 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7C31DC52D1D for ; Tue, 30 Jul 2024 19:24:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sYsS2-0002m7-FF; Tue, 30 Jul 2024 15:24:02 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sYsRu-0002Nj-Bp; Tue, 30 Jul 2024 15:23:54 -0400 Received: from mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.158.5]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sYsRs-0002HS-Ld; Tue, 30 Jul 2024 15:23:54 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (m0353724.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.18.1.2/8.18.1.2) with ESMTP id 46UISUjR004647; Tue, 30 Jul 2024 19:23:44 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ibm.com; h=from :to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=pp1; bh= NdE/Fyel2C7AFtVEeKtdExqkuy8FZQ5dd9vlztjZABc=; b=CLdJcxqWEpizOnDw qme2wXj9uGqJY1yD77x1/y9izrfmg+A1g0azJq8eyatKHwZ1mENm1SPmCoXbQdSz VBi/R06doHJNhztAJSdMDpby2FtDTLXBK5m2Dm1ODpzum7cK6pA69CmCdvF9cF2r kKFNAt5q/TN6YdXuguTWT0NlEQ3r3lLyhtQ3YTAX821nzJBGMXgC4XAg6nkom9QS pH0Of5eK0j0Mz0+PHrpVWQOHfn5H+G69FdEqstI0MoGRtAJ594+MvuxOaRsmHiWQ Sx1KtiifjSnfqbCvY7k/k0C/0quuVOdb3TvsHkk9hXL+w860hztXERNnJkGfivTw dze/zQ== Received: from pps.reinject (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 40q5fx03h7-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 30 Jul 2024 19:23:44 +0000 (GMT) Received: from m0353724.ppops.net (m0353724.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by pps.reinject (8.18.0.8/8.18.0.8) with ESMTP id 46UJNhM5032211; Tue, 30 Jul 2024 19:23:43 GMT Received: from ppma12.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (dc.9e.1632.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [50.22.158.220]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 40q5fx03h6-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 30 Jul 2024 19:23:43 +0000 (GMT) Received: from pps.filterd (ppma12.dal12v.mail.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma12.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (8.17.1.19/8.17.1.19) with ESMTP id 46UGU54k007479; Tue, 30 Jul 2024 19:23:42 GMT Received: from smtprelay02.fra02v.mail.ibm.com ([9.218.2.226]) by ppma12.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 40nb7u6w7u-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 30 Jul 2024 19:23:42 +0000 Received: from smtpav02.fra02v.mail.ibm.com (smtpav02.fra02v.mail.ibm.com [10.20.54.101]) by smtprelay02.fra02v.mail.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 46UJNbV253936570 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 30 Jul 2024 19:23:39 GMT Received: from smtpav02.fra02v.mail.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7AD4520043; Tue, 30 Jul 2024 19:23:37 +0000 (GMT) Received: from smtpav02.fra02v.mail.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 239F920040; Tue, 30 Jul 2024 19:23:35 +0000 (GMT) Received: from li-3c92a0cc-27cf-11b2-a85c-b804d9ca68fa.ibm.com.com (unknown [9.195.42.9]) by smtpav02.fra02v.mail.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Tue, 30 Jul 2024 19:23:34 +0000 (GMT) From: Aditya Gupta To: Mahesh J Salgaonkar , Madhavan Srinivasan , Nicholas Piggin , =?utf-8?q?C=C3=A9dric_Le_Goater?= , Harsh Prateek Bora Cc: , , Daniel Henrique Barboza Subject: [PATCH v6 3/5] target/ppc: Fix regression due to Power10 and Power11 having same PCR Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2024 00:53:23 +0530 Message-ID: <20240730192325.669771-4-adityag@linux.ibm.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.45.2 In-Reply-To: <20240730192325.669771-1-adityag@linux.ibm.com> References: <20240730192325.669771-1-adityag@linux.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-GUID: LXPk5SEM5aCvgVVHrJvpAWWbpnsoN_03 X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: ST9M8qMuPDfxoSCywy470HbwJxkhGMgr X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.293,Aquarius:18.0.1039,Hydra:6.0.680,FMLib:17.12.28.16 definitions=2024-07-30_15,2024-07-30_01,2024-05-17_01 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 clxscore=1015 malwarescore=0 bulkscore=0 priorityscore=1501 impostorscore=0 phishscore=0 mlxlogscore=909 suspectscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 adultscore=0 spamscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.19.0-2407110000 definitions=main-2407300134 Received-SPF: pass client-ip=148.163.158.5; envelope-from=adityag@linux.ibm.com; helo=mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com X-Spam_score_int: -19 X-Spam_score: -2.0 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.0 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Power11 has the same PCR (Processor Compatibility Register) value, as Power10. Due to this, QEMU considers Power11 as a valid compat-mode for Power10, ie. earlier it was possible to run QEMU with '-M pseries,max-compat-mode=power11 --cpu power10' Same PCR also introduced a regression where `-M pseries --cpu power10` boots as Power11 (ie. logical PVR is of Power11, even though PVR is Power10). The regression was due to 'do_client_architecture_support' checking for valid compat modes and finding Power11 to be a valid compat mode for Power10 (it happens even without passing 'max-compat-mode' explicitly). Fix compat-mode issue and regression, by ensuring a future Power processor (with a higher logical_pvr value, eg. P11) cannot be valid compat-mode for an older Power processor (eg. P10) Cc: Cédric Le Goater Cc: Daniel Henrique Barboza Cc: Harsh Prateek Bora Cc: Mahesh J Salgaonkar Cc: Madhavan Srinivasan Cc: Nicholas Piggin Reviewed-by: Nicholas Piggin Signed-off-by: Aditya Gupta --- target/ppc/compat.c | 4 ++++ 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) diff --git a/target/ppc/compat.c b/target/ppc/compat.c index ebef2cccecf3..5b20fd7ef04c 100644 --- a/target/ppc/compat.c +++ b/target/ppc/compat.c @@ -132,6 +132,10 @@ static bool pcc_compat(PowerPCCPUClass *pcc, uint32_t compat_pvr, /* Outside specified range */ return false; } + if (compat->pvr > pcc->spapr_logical_pvr) { + /* Older CPU cannot support a newer processor's compat mode */ + return false; + } if (!(pcc->pcr_supported & compat->pcr_level)) { /* Not supported by this CPU */ return false;