[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] vl: rework smp_parse
From: |
Eduardo Habkost |
Subject: |
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] vl: rework smp_parse |
Date: |
Fri, 7 Nov 2014 10:16:06 -0200 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) |
On Fri, Nov 07, 2014 at 12:21:26PM +0100, Andrew Jones wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 07, 2014 at 10:52:31AM +0100, Andrew Jones wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 07, 2014 at 10:40:14AM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > On 07/11/2014 10:29, Andrew Jones wrote:
> > > >> > I think this would cause too many failures in the wild. Perhaps
> > > >> > error
> > > >> > out if it is lower, and warn if sockets * cores * threads > max_cpus
> > > >> > since we actually allow hot-plug a thread at a time?
> > > > We'd still have more failures if we choose to error out when it's lower,
> > > > since we currently silently adjust threads in some of those cases, or
> > > > just don't care that the topology doesn't support up to maxcpus in
> > > > other.
> > >
> > > So I guess we need a decent fallback if it doesn't match. Something
> > > like (based also on the reply from Eduardo):
> > >
> > > 1) always warn if max_cpus % (cores*threads) != 0 || smp_cpus %
> > > (cores*threads) != 0
> > >
> > > 2) if sockets*cpus*threads < max_cpus, adjust sockets to
> > > DIV_ROUND_UP(max_cpus, cores*threads). If we didn't warn in step 1, do
> > > it now. Give a different, less harsh warning if the cmdline
> > > sockets*cpus*threads did match smp_cpus. In the latter case, the user
> > > _almost_ knows what he was doing.
> > >
> > > Not perfect, but it could be something to start from. Adjusting sockets
> > > is better than adjusting threads.
> >
> > OK. I can whip up a v2 that is less harsh (more warnings, less aborts).
> > I'll also address the other issue I mentioned in the bottom of my reply
> > to Eduardo, which is to make sure we consider machine_class->max_cpus.
>
> After talking with Igor, it seems like the better approach is to get
> smp parameters converted over to machine properties, allowing us to
> use the old parser for old machine types, and the new for new. I'll
> look into it.
While we work on that, I think we could at least change the existing
code to abort if sockets*cores*threads < smp_cpus (when all 4 options
are present in the command-line), and never adjust any option silently.
--
Eduardo
- [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] vl: rework smp_parse, Andrew Jones, 2014/11/06
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] vl: rework smp_parse, Eduardo Habkost, 2014/11/06
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] vl: rework smp_parse, Paolo Bonzini, 2014/11/06
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] vl: rework smp_parse, Andrew Jones, 2014/11/07
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] vl: rework smp_parse, Paolo Bonzini, 2014/11/07
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] vl: rework smp_parse, Andrew Jones, 2014/11/07
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] vl: rework smp_parse, Andrew Jones, 2014/11/07
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] vl: rework smp_parse,
Eduardo Habkost <=
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] vl: rework smp_parse, Andrew Jones, 2014/11/07
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] vl: rework smp_parse, Eduardo Habkost, 2014/11/07
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] vl: rework smp_parse, Andrew Jones, 2014/11/07