[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] smbios: Fix assertion on socket count calculati
From: |
Michael S. Tsirkin |
Subject: |
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] smbios: Fix assertion on socket count calculation |
Date: |
Tue, 30 Sep 2014 14:50:43 +0300 |
On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 12:07:17PM +0200, Igor Mammedov wrote:
> On Mon, 29 Sep 2014 22:21:45 -0300
> Eduardo Habkost <address@hidden> wrote:
>
> > QEMU currently allows the number of VCPUs to not be a multiple of the
> > number of threads per socket, but the smbios socket count calculation
> > introduced by commit c97294ec1b9e36887e119589d456557d72ab37b5 doesn't
> > take that into account, triggering an assertion. e.g.:
> >
> > $ ./x86_64-softmmu/qemu-system-x86_64 -smp 4,sockets=2,cores=6,threads=1
> > qemu-system-x86_64:
> > /home/ehabkost/rh/proj/virt/qemu/hw/i386/smbios.c:825: smbios_get_tables:
> > Assertion `smbios_smp_sockets >= 1' failed.
> > Aborted (core dumped)
> >
> > Socket count calculation doesn't belong to smbios.c and should
> > eventually be moved to the main SMP topology configuration code. But
> > while we don't move the code, at least make it correct by rounding up
> > the division.
> >
> > Cc: Gabriel Somlo <address@hidden>
> > Cc: address@hidden
> > Signed-off-by: Eduardo Habkost <address@hidden>
> > ---
> > hw/i386/smbios.c | 2 +-
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/hw/i386/smbios.c b/hw/i386/smbios.c
> > index e3fa1b2..0ae5960 100644
> > --- a/hw/i386/smbios.c
> > +++ b/hw/i386/smbios.c
> > @@ -821,7 +821,7 @@ void smbios_get_tables(uint8_t **tables, size_t
> > *tables_len,
> > smbios_build_type_2_table();
> > smbios_build_type_3_table();
> >
> > - smbios_smp_sockets = smp_cpus / (smp_cores * smp_threads);
> > + smbios_smp_sockets = DIV_ROUND_UP(smp_cpus, smp_cores *
> > smp_threads);
> > assert(smbios_smp_sockets >= 1);
> >
> > for (i = 0; i < smbios_smp_sockets; i++) {
>
> Reviewed-By: Igor Mammedov <address@hidden>
Please spell it with lower-case b:
Reviewed-by: Igor Mammedov <address@hidden>
Applied, thanks!