On 15/02/19 12:33, Igor Mammedov wrote: > On Thu, 14 Feb 2019 19:11:27 +0100 > Paolo Bonzini <pbonz...@redhat.com> wrote: > >> On 14/02/19 15:07, Igor Mammedov wrote: >>> Also some boards (ab)use memory_region_allocate_system_memory(), calling it >>> several >>> times to allocate various fixed sized chunks of RAM and ROMs, which is >>> problematic >>> to map to a single initial RAM Machine::memdev backend and is currently >>> broken if >>> -mem-path points to a not hugepage pool. >> >> This is certainly a good idea. However, I'm not sure why you would need >> a memdev property on the Machine instead of just allowing 1 -numa node, >> which is what really is. > > using '-numa node' would be confusing to user when he/she is not interested > in numa usecase > it also would enable numa fdt/acpi parts generated automatically (fixable but > then again > it adds more to confusion) and in the end there are boards that do not > support numa at all > (s390x).
Fair enough. What about -m, too? Then you'd specify a memdev instead of the initial memory size. Paolo
