Re: [PATCH v20 01/21] s390x/cpu topology: add s390 specifics to CPU topology

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

 



On 03/05/2023 11.36, Pierre Morel wrote:

On 4/27/23 10:04, Thomas Huth wrote:
On 25/04/2023 18.14, Pierre Morel wrote:
S390 adds two new SMP levels, drawers and books to the CPU
topology.
The S390 CPU have specific topology features like dedication
and entitlement to give to the guest indications on the host
vCPUs scheduling and help the guest take the best decisions
on the scheduling of threads on the vCPUs.

Let us provide the SMP properties with books and drawers levels
and S390 CPU with dedication and entitlement,

Signed-off-by: Pierre Morel <pmorel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>


[...]


  {
      MachineClass *mc = MACHINE_GET_CLASS(ms);
      unsigned cpus    = config->has_cpus ? config->cpus : 0;
+    unsigned drawers = config->has_drawers ? config->drawers : 0;
+    unsigned books   = config->has_books ? config->books : 0;
      unsigned sockets = config->has_sockets ? config->sockets : 0;
      unsigned dies    = config->has_dies ? config->dies : 0;
      unsigned clusters = config->has_clusters ? config->clusters : 0;
@@ -85,6 +98,8 @@ void machine_parse_smp_config(MachineState *ms,
       * explicit configuration like "cpus=0" is not allowed.
       */
      if ((config->has_cpus && config->cpus == 0) ||
+        (config->has_drawers && config->drawers == 0) ||
+        (config->has_books && config->books == 0) ||
          (config->has_sockets && config->sockets == 0) ||
          (config->has_dies && config->dies == 0) ||
          (config->has_clusters && config->clusters == 0) ||
@@ -111,6 +126,19 @@ void machine_parse_smp_config(MachineState *ms,
      dies = dies > 0 ? dies : 1;
      clusters = clusters > 0 ? clusters : 1;
  +    if (!mc->smp_props.books_supported && books > 1) {
+        error_setg(errp, "books not supported by this machine's CPU topology");
+        return;
+    }
+    books = books > 0 ? books : 1;

Could be shortened to:  book = books ?: 1;

More thinking about this, all other existing assignments are done so, clusters, dies, sockets, cores and threads.

to keep the core consistent shouldn't we keep it the same way?

Fine for me, too. It just might happen that I forget about it and suggest it again in a future version of the patch ;-)

 Thomas




[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