On Wed, 18 Jan 2017 16:57:13 -0200
Eduardo Habkost <ehabk...@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 06:13:24PM +0100, Igor Mammedov wrote:
> > it will allow generic numa code to set cpu to numa node mapping
> > in target independent manner in the next patch.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Igor Mammedov <imamm...@redhat.com>
> > ---
> > hw/i386/pc.c | 56 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > 1 file changed, 56 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/hw/i386/pc.c b/hw/i386/pc.c
> > index f8ea635..1d33a5e 100644
> > --- a/hw/i386/pc.c
> > +++ b/hw/i386/pc.c
> > @@ -2201,6 +2201,56 @@ static void pc_machine_set_pit(Object *obj, bool
> > value, Error **errp)
> > pcms->pit = value;
> > }
> >
> > +static void pc_machine_set_cpu(Object *obj, Visitor *v, const char *name,
> > + void *opaque, Error **errp)
> > +{
> > + uint32_t apic_id;
> > + X86CPUTopoInfo topo;
> > + CPUArchId *cpu_slot;
> > + Error *local_err = NULL;
> > + CpuInstanceProperties *cpu_props = NULL;
> > + PCMachineState *pcms = PC_MACHINE(obj);
> > + MachineClass *mc = MACHINE_GET_CLASS(obj);
> > +
> > + visit_type_CpuInstanceProperties(v, name, &cpu_props, &local_err);
> > + if (local_err) {
> > + goto out;
> > + }
> > +
> > + if (!cpu_props->has_node_id) {
> > + error_setg(&local_err, "node-id property is not specified");
> > + goto out;
> > + }
> > +
> > + /*
> > + * make sure that possible_cpus is initialized
> > + * as property setter might be called before machine init is called
> > + */
> > + mc->possible_cpu_arch_ids(MACHINE(obj));
> > +
> > + topo.pkg_id = cpu_props->socket_id;
> > + topo.core_id = cpu_props->core_id;
> > + topo.smt_id = cpu_props->thread_id;
> > + apic_id = apicid_from_topo_ids(smp_cores, smp_threads, &topo);
> > + cpu_slot = pc_find_cpu_slot(pcms, apic_id, NULL);
>
> If we make TYPE_MACHINE provide an API to query CPU slots, e.g.:
> CPUArchId *machine_find_cpu_slot(MachineState *m, CpuInstanceProperties
> *props)
so if there is no objections,
I'll move possible_cpus to MachineState
and add to MachineClass above callback so target machine
would be able to provide arch specific lookup function.
it should work for both x86 and ARM.
> CPUArchId *machine_slot_for_cpu(MachineState *m, CPUState *cpu)
probably won't work for SPAPR where they have cores,
machine_find_cpu_slot() alone might be sufficient.
> (Which can probably be implemented using
> MachineClass::possible_cpu_arch_ids(), already)
>
> Then this function could be implemented in a generic way, and all
> existing calls of:
> numa_get_node_for_cpu(cpu->cpu_index)
> could be easily replaced by:
> machine_slot_for_cpu(cpu)->props.node_id
most of such places could be replaced directly by plain
cpu->node_id
>
> This should make it easier to get rid numa_info[].node_cpu.
PS:
Adding Bharata to CC so SPAPR side could voice their opinion.
> > + if (!cpu_slot) {
> > + error_setg(&local_err, "unable to find CPU");
> > + goto out;
> > + }
> > +
> > + if (cpu_slot->props.has_node_id) {
> > + error_setg(&local_err, "CPU has already been assigned to node:
> > %"PRId64,
> > + cpu_slot->props.node_id);
> > + goto out;
> > + }
> > + cpu_slot->props.has_node_id = true;
> > + cpu_slot->props.node_id = cpu_props->node_id;
> > +
> > + out:
> > + error_propagate(errp, local_err);
> > + qapi_free_CpuInstanceProperties(cpu_props);
> > +}
> > +
> > static void pc_machine_initfn(Object *obj)
> > {
> > PCMachineState *pcms = PC_MACHINE(obj);
> > @@ -2395,6 +2445,12 @@ static void pc_machine_class_init(ObjectClass *oc,
> > void *data)
> >
> > object_class_property_add_bool(oc, PC_MACHINE_PIT,
> > pc_machine_get_pit, pc_machine_set_pit, &error_abort);
> > +
> > + object_class_property_add(oc, "cpu", "CpuInstanceProperties",
> > + NULL, pc_machine_set_cpu,
> > + NULL, NULL, &error_abort);
> > + object_class_property_set_description(oc, "cpu",
> > + "Possible cpu placement", &error_abort);
> > }
> >
> > static const TypeInfo pc_machine_info = {
> > --
> > 2.7.4
> >
>
