On Mon, 5 Aug 2019 15:13:02 +0800
Tao Xu <tao3...@intel.com> wrote:
> Add MachineClass::auto_enable_numa field. When it is true, a NUMA node
> is expected to be created implicitly.
>
> Acked-by: David Gibson <da...@gibson.dropbear.id.au>
> Suggested-by: Igor Mammedov <imamm...@redhat.com>
> Suggested-by: Eduardo Habkost <ehabk...@redhat.com>
> Signed-off-by: Tao Xu <tao3...@intel.com>
> ---
>
> This patch has a dependency on
> https://patchwork.kernel.org/cover/11063235/
> ---
> hw/core/numa.c | 9 +++++++--
> hw/ppc/spapr.c | 9 +--------
> include/hw/boards.h | 1 +
> 3 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/hw/core/numa.c b/hw/core/numa.c
> index 75db35ac19..756d243d3f 100644
> --- a/hw/core/numa.c
> +++ b/hw/core/numa.c
> @@ -580,9 +580,14 @@ void numa_complete_configuration(MachineState *ms)
> * guest tries to use it with that drivers.
> *
> * Enable NUMA implicitly by adding a new NUMA node automatically.
> + *
> + * Or if MachineClass::auto_enable_numa is true and no NUMA nodes,
> + * assume there is just one node with whole RAM.
> */
> - if (ms->ram_slots > 0 && ms->numa_state->num_nodes == 0 &&
> - mc->auto_enable_numa_with_memhp) {
> + if (ms->numa_state->num_nodes == 0 &&
> + ((ms->ram_slots > 0 &&
> + mc->auto_enable_numa_with_memhp) ||
> + mc->auto_enable_numa)) {
> NumaNodeOptions node = { };
> parse_numa_node(ms, &node, &error_abort);
> }
> diff --git a/hw/ppc/spapr.c b/hw/ppc/spapr.c
> index f607ca567b..e50343f326 100644
> --- a/hw/ppc/spapr.c
> +++ b/hw/ppc/spapr.c
> @@ -400,14 +400,6 @@ static int spapr_populate_memory(SpaprMachineState
> *spapr, void *fdt)
> hwaddr mem_start, node_size;
> int i, nb_nodes = machine->numa_state->num_nodes;
> NodeInfo *nodes = machine->numa_state->nodes;
> - NodeInfo ramnode;
> -
> - /* No NUMA nodes, assume there is just one node with whole RAM */
> - if (!nb_nodes) {
> - nb_nodes = 1;
> - ramnode.node_mem = machine->ram_size;
> - nodes = &ramnode;
> - }
>
> for (i = 0, mem_start = 0; i < nb_nodes; ++i) {
> if (!nodes[i].node_mem) {
> @@ -4369,6 +4361,7 @@ static void spapr_machine_class_init(ObjectClass *oc,
> void *data)
> */
> mc->numa_mem_align_shift = 28;
> mc->numa_mem_supported = true;
> + mc->auto_enable_numa = true;
this will always create a numa node (that will affect not only RAM but
also all other components that depends on numa state (like CPUs)),
where as spapr_populate_memory() was only faking numa node in DT for RAM.
It makes non-numa configuration impossible.
Seeing David's ACK on the patch it might be fine, but I believe
commit message should capture that and explain why the change in
behavior is fine.
> smc->default_caps.caps[SPAPR_CAP_HTM] = SPAPR_CAP_OFF;
> smc->default_caps.caps[SPAPR_CAP_VSX] = SPAPR_CAP_ON;
> diff --git a/include/hw/boards.h b/include/hw/boards.h
> index 2eb9a0b4e0..4a350b87d2 100644
> --- a/include/hw/boards.h
> +++ b/include/hw/boards.h
> @@ -220,6 +220,7 @@ struct MachineClass {
> bool smbus_no_migration_support;
> bool nvdimm_supported;
> bool numa_mem_supported;
> + bool auto_enable_numa;
>
> HotplugHandler *(*get_hotplug_handler)(MachineState *machine,
> DeviceState *dev);
