From patchwork Wed Jul 31 05:50:20 2024 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: Aditya Gupta X-Patchwork-Id: 13748081 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 8C8A0C3DA64 for ; Wed, 31 Jul 2024 05:51:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sZ2Ef-0002xZ-LT; Wed, 31 Jul 2024 01:50:53 -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 1sZ2Ed-0002nE-2Y; Wed, 31 Jul 2024 01:50:51 -0400 Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.156.1]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sZ2Eb-0007Na-Ee; Wed, 31 Jul 2024 01:50:50 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (m0353729.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.18.1.2/8.18.1.2) with ESMTP id 46V5KIWR007694; Wed, 31 Jul 2024 05:50:39 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=gCQoZ2tSDDPBUCCT A+ejLfUQt5Vin6vkNAAo9Cm9K0iJsWWya9VkzhazvFv7rpJgMjpV45MpFhDpICVj lyoD3zxObKg/WuONihTALo6yOYgTK/KCPRkIvyzwuTjSbBr/hhgHVeib3oajkkp1 TO8K5gjbbN00mXPKWwbyf0wrlbcGhff/UAhT7Y+6gmWEbz0Kyapgq/tvyfm1hgpu tV1e64p4yptYI9fgeS+HYe+600QtfXz+WDYgQjlbyYL3ExzjUZgkBupcug1oD1LL Kgfbq87jrnncpGMoOxJOeR6Px5JUz2w9KV6hlUWX7jrSUKt2Rtw475ByMQ5whaGA l9aiTg== Received: from pps.reinject (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 40qcgvgbbr-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 31 Jul 2024 05:50:39 +0000 (GMT) Received: from m0353729.ppops.net (m0353729.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by pps.reinject (8.18.0.8/8.18.0.8) with ESMTP id 46V5od9L026425; Wed, 31 Jul 2024 05:50:39 GMT Received: from ppma21.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com (5b.69.3da9.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [169.61.105.91]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 40qcgvgbbj-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 31 Jul 2024 05:50:38 +0000 (GMT) Received: from pps.filterd (ppma21.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma21.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com (8.17.1.19/8.17.1.19) with ESMTP id 46V5dIEi018811; Wed, 31 Jul 2024 05:50:37 GMT Received: from smtprelay07.fra02v.mail.ibm.com ([9.218.2.229]) by ppma21.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 40nc7psmrf-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 31 Jul 2024 05:50:37 +0000 Received: from smtpav01.fra02v.mail.ibm.com (smtpav01.fra02v.mail.ibm.com [10.20.54.100]) by smtprelay07.fra02v.mail.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 46V5oVi453608924 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 31 Jul 2024 05:50:33 GMT Received: from smtpav01.fra02v.mail.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0B882004B; Wed, 31 Jul 2024 05:50:31 +0000 (GMT) Received: from smtpav01.fra02v.mail.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 14A5D20040; Wed, 31 Jul 2024 05:50:30 +0000 (GMT) Received: from li-3c92a0cc-27cf-11b2-a85c-b804d9ca68fa.in.ibm.com (unknown [9.109.199.72]) by smtpav01.fra02v.mail.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Wed, 31 Jul 2024 05:50:29 +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 RESEND 3/5] target/ppc: Fix regression due to Power10 and Power11 having same PCR Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2024 11:20:20 +0530 Message-ID: <20240731055022.696051-4-adityag@linux.ibm.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.45.2 In-Reply-To: <20240731055022.696051-1-adityag@linux.ibm.com> References: <20240731055022.696051-1-adityag@linux.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: 1undvf2mfXac0xn0IF91kFSN7ImfIiS- X-Proofpoint-GUID: p30L59jvZik3sFtGckDO9bm-pWPxCVbp 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=2024-07-31_02,2024-07-30_01,2024-05-17_01 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 mlxlogscore=909 clxscore=1015 phishscore=0 mlxscore=0 priorityscore=1501 bulkscore=0 adultscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 spamscore=0 impostorscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.19.0-2407110000 definitions=main-2407310039 Received-SPF: pass client-ip=148.163.156.1; envelope-from=adityag@linux.ibm.com; helo=mx0a-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;