On Mon, 29 Jul 2013 15:41:57 -0400
"Jason J. Herne" <jjhe...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> On 06/08/2013 09:11 PM, Andreas Färber wrote:
> >> if (tcg_enabled() && !inited) {
> >> > inited = true;
> >> > s390x_translate_init();
> >> > }
> >> >+
> >> >+ smp_cpus += 1;
> > Won't we need some form of locking?
> >
> > If we fiddle with a global CPU counter, we should do so in qom/cpu.c,
> > not just in s390x code.
> >
>
> I've redesigned a lot of this to make it simpler and less intrusive.
> I'm almost ready to post the next revision but I'm hung up on this one
> thing.
>
> I moved the smp_cpu increment to qom/cpu.c : cpu_common_realizefn.
> However this seems to break the user mode target because smp_cpus does
> not exist. I tried wrapping the increment in a #ifndef CONFIG_USER_ONLY
> statement but it seems to have no effect. I think the reason for that
> is because CONFIG_USER_ONLY is added to config-target.h which is not
> actually generated until after we compile qom/cpu.c.
>
> ...
> CC qom/object.o
> CC qom/container.o
> CC qom/qom-qobject.o
> CC qom/cpu.o
> CC hw/core/qdev.o
> CC hw/core/qdev-properties.o
> CC hw/core/irq.o
> GEN s390x-linux-user/config-target.h
> CC s390x-linux-user/exec.o
> ...
>
> Is there another place I should put the increment?
Could you just use current number of cpus instead of smp_cpus increment?
