Re: [Qemu-ppc] [PATCH 2/8] monitor: add ability to dump SLB entries

[Alexander Graf]

On 13.12.2011, at 05:24, David Gibson wrote:

> From: Nishanth Aravamudan <address@hidden>
> 
> When run with a PPC Book3S (server) CPU Currently 'info tlb' in the
> qemu monitor reports "dump_mmu: unimplemented".  However, during
> bringup work, it can be quite handy to have the SLB entries, which are
> available in the CPUPPCState.  This patch adds an implementation of
> info tlb for book3s, which dumps the SLB.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Nishanth Aravamudan <address@hidden>
> Signed-off-by: David Gibson <address@hidden>
> ---
> target-ppc/helper.c |   32 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
> 1 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/target-ppc/helper.c b/target-ppc/helper.c
> index 137a494..29c7050 100644
> --- a/target-ppc/helper.c
> +++ b/target-ppc/helper.c
> @@ -1545,14 +1545,36 @@ static void mmubooke206_dump_mmu(FILE *f, 
> fprintf_function cpu_fprintf,
>     }
> }
> 
> +static void mmubooks_dump_mmu(FILE *f, fprintf_function cpu_fprintf,
> +                              CPUState *env)
> +{
> +    int i;
> +    uint64_t slbe, slbv;
> +
> +    cpu_synchronize_state(env);
> +
> +    cpu_fprintf(f, "SLB\tESID\t\t\tVSID\n");
> +    for (i = 0; i < env->slb_nr; i++) {
> +        slbe = env->slb[i].esid;
> +        slbv = env->slb[i].vsid;
> +        if (slbe == 0 && slbv == 0) {
> +            continue;
> +        }
> +        cpu_fprintf(f, "%d\t0x%016" PRIx64 "\t0x%016" PRIx64 "\n",
> +                    i, slbe, slbv);
> +    }
> +}
> +
> void dump_mmu(FILE *f, fprintf_function cpu_fprintf, CPUState *env)
> {
> -    switch (env->mmu_model) {
> -    case POWERPC_MMU_BOOKE206:
> +    if (env->mmu_model == POWERPC_MMU_BOOKE206) {
>         mmubooke206_dump_mmu(f, cpu_fprintf, env);
> -        break;
> -    default:
> -        cpu_fprintf(f, "%s: unimplemented\n", __func__);
> +    } else {
> +        if ((env->mmu_model & POWERPC_MMU_64B) != 0) {
> +            mmubooks_dump_mmu(f, cpu_fprintf, env);
> +        } else {
> +            cpu_fprintf(f, "%s: unimplemented\n", __func__);
> +        }

Didn't I comment on this one before, saying that it should stay a switch? In 
fact, I even applied his v2 already.


Alex