Re: [PATCH v9 01/10] s390x/cpus: Make absence of multithreading clear

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 





On 9/5/22 13:32, Nico Boehr wrote:
Quoting Pierre Morel (2022-09-02 09:55:22)
S390x do not support multithreading in the guest.
Do not let admin falsely specify multithreading on QEMU
smp commandline.

Signed-off-by: Pierre Morel <pmorel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
  hw/s390x/s390-virtio-ccw.c | 3 +++
  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)

diff --git a/hw/s390x/s390-virtio-ccw.c b/hw/s390x/s390-virtio-ccw.c
index 70229b102b..b5ca154e2f 100644
--- a/hw/s390x/s390-virtio-ccw.c
+++ b/hw/s390x/s390-virtio-ccw.c
@@ -86,6 +86,9 @@ static void s390_init_cpus(MachineState *machine)
      MachineClass *mc = MACHINE_GET_CLASS(machine);
      int i;
+ /* Explicitely do not support threads */
           ^
           Explicitly

+    assert(machine->smp.threads == 1);

It might be nicer to give a better error message to the user.
What do you think about something like (broken whitespace ahead):

     if (machine->smp.threads != 1) {if (machine->smp.threads != 1) {
         error_setg(&error_fatal, "More than one thread specified, but multithreading unsupported");
         return;
     }



OK, I think I wanted to do this and I changed my mind, obviously, I do not recall why. I will do almost the same but after a look at error.h I will use error_report()/exit() instead of error_setg()/return as in:


+    /* Explicitly do not support threads */
+    if (machine->smp.threads != 1) {
+ error_report("More than one thread specified, but multithreading unsupported");
+        exit(1);
+    }


Thanks,

Regards,
Pierre

--
Pierre Morel
IBM Lab Boeblingen



[Index of Archives]     [KVM ARM]     [KVM ia64]     [KVM ppc]     [Virtualization Tools]     [Spice Development]     [Libvirt]     [Libvirt Users]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Questions]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]

  Powered by Linux