Re: [PATCH v4 0/4] hmat acpi: Don't require initiator value in -numa
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 17:08:48 +0100 Jonathan Cameron wrote: > On Thu, 30 Jun 2022 09:30:58 -0400 > "Michael S. Tsirkin" wrote: > > > On Thu, Jun 30, 2022 at 02:40:13PM +0200, Brice Goglin wrote: > > > > > > Le 30/06/2022 à 14:23, Igor Mammedov a écrit : > > > > On Thu, 30 Jun 2022 09:36:47 +0200 > > > > Brice Goglin wrote: > > > > > > > > > Allow -numa without initiator value when hmat=on so that we may > > > > > build more complex topologies, e.g. NUMA nodes whose best initiators > > > > > are not just another single node. > > > > > > > > > patches looks fine code-wise, > > > > however something wrong with them, i.e. 'git am' doesn't like them > > > > nor ./scripts/checkpatch (which one should use before sending patches). > > > > > > > > I've checked it's not my mail server/client issue(or whatever) > > > > that corrupts them (ones downloaded from patchew are broken as well) > > > > > > > > > I don't know what's going on. These 4 patches are in > > > https://github.com/bgoglin/qemu/commits/hmat-noinitiator (rebased on > > > master > > > 10mn ago). > > > > It's the commit log that's corrupted. > > > > > Do whatever you want with them. I am not allowed to spend more time on > > > this. > > > > > > Brice > > > > Maybe someone will fix up the log and repost. One can hope .. > > > > We are planning to send out arm/virt support shortly including a similar test > that uses this series. So if no one else gets to it before hand we'll include > fixed up version of Brice's series with that. Looking at headers, it looks like patches where sent with Thunderbird which may corrupted patches (unless special care was taken). If one would've used 'git send-email', it is likely patches would be fine. > > Jonathan >
Re: [PATCH v4 0/4] hmat acpi: Don't require initiator value in -numa
On Thu, 30 Jun 2022 09:30:58 -0400 "Michael S. Tsirkin" wrote: > On Thu, Jun 30, 2022 at 02:40:13PM +0200, Brice Goglin wrote: > > > > Le 30/06/2022 à 14:23, Igor Mammedov a écrit : > > > On Thu, 30 Jun 2022 09:36:47 +0200 > > > Brice Goglin wrote: > > > > > > > Allow -numa without initiator value when hmat=on so that we may > > > > build more complex topologies, e.g. NUMA nodes whose best initiators > > > > are not just another single node. > > > > > > > patches looks fine code-wise, > > > however something wrong with them, i.e. 'git am' doesn't like them > > > nor ./scripts/checkpatch (which one should use before sending patches). > > > > > > I've checked it's not my mail server/client issue(or whatever) > > > that corrupts them (ones downloaded from patchew are broken as well) > > > > > > I don't know what's going on. These 4 patches are in > > https://github.com/bgoglin/qemu/commits/hmat-noinitiator (rebased on master > > 10mn ago). > > It's the commit log that's corrupted. > > > Do whatever you want with them. I am not allowed to spend more time on this. > > > > Brice > > Maybe someone will fix up the log and repost. One can hope .. > We are planning to send out arm/virt support shortly including a similar test that uses this series. So if no one else gets to it before hand we'll include fixed up version of Brice's series with that. Jonathan
Re: [PATCH v4 0/4] hmat acpi: Don't require initiator value in -numa
On Thu, Jun 30, 2022 at 02:40:13PM +0200, Brice Goglin wrote: > > Le 30/06/2022 à 14:23, Igor Mammedov a écrit : > > On Thu, 30 Jun 2022 09:36:47 +0200 > > Brice Goglin wrote: > > > > > Allow -numa without initiator value when hmat=on so that we may > > > build more complex topologies, e.g. NUMA nodes whose best initiators > > > are not just another single node. > > > > > patches looks fine code-wise, > > however something wrong with them, i.e. 'git am' doesn't like them > > nor ./scripts/checkpatch (which one should use before sending patches). > > > > I've checked it's not my mail server/client issue(or whatever) > > that corrupts them (ones downloaded from patchew are broken as well) > > > I don't know what's going on. These 4 patches are in > https://github.com/bgoglin/qemu/commits/hmat-noinitiator (rebased on master > 10mn ago). It's the commit log that's corrupted. > Do whatever you want with them. I am not allowed to spend more time on this. > > Brice Maybe someone will fix up the log and repost. One can hope .. -- MST
Re: [PATCH v4 0/4] hmat acpi: Don't require initiator value in -numa
On Thu, Jun 30, 2022 at 02:56:16PM +0200, Igor Mammedov wrote: > On Thu, 30 Jun 2022 14:40:13 +0200 > Brice Goglin wrote: > > > Le 30/06/2022 à 14:23, Igor Mammedov a écrit : > > > On Thu, 30 Jun 2022 09:36:47 +0200 > > > Brice Goglin wrote: > > > > > >> Allow -numa without initiator value when hmat=on so that we may > > >> build more complex topologies, e.g. NUMA nodes whose best initiators > > >> are not just another single node. > > >> > > > patches looks fine code-wise, > > > however something wrong with them, i.e. 'git am' doesn't like them > > > nor ./scripts/checkpatch (which one should use before sending patches). > > > > > > I've checked it's not my mail server/client issue(or whatever) > > > that corrupts them (ones downloaded from patchew are broken as well) > > > > > > I don't know what's going on. These 4 patches are in > > https://github.com/bgoglin/qemu/commits/hmat-noinitiator (rebased on > > master 10mn ago). > > I'm not sure if we take patches from directly from git-forges, > I guess it's upto maintainers. > > CCing Michael, > since these should go through his tree I could if nothing else worked, but I would much rather get patches that did get processed by patchew and other automated mail based tools. > > > > Do whatever you want with them. I am not allowed to spend more time on this. > > > > Brice > > > > > >
Re: [PATCH v4 0/4] hmat acpi: Don't require initiator value in -numa
On Thu, 30 Jun 2022 14:40:13 +0200 Brice Goglin wrote: > Le 30/06/2022 à 14:23, Igor Mammedov a écrit : > > On Thu, 30 Jun 2022 09:36:47 +0200 > > Brice Goglin wrote: > > > >> Allow -numa without initiator value when hmat=on so that we may > >> build more complex topologies, e.g. NUMA nodes whose best initiators > >> are not just another single node. > >> > > patches looks fine code-wise, > > however something wrong with them, i.e. 'git am' doesn't like them > > nor ./scripts/checkpatch (which one should use before sending patches). > > > > I've checked it's not my mail server/client issue(or whatever) > > that corrupts them (ones downloaded from patchew are broken as well) > > > I don't know what's going on. These 4 patches are in > https://github.com/bgoglin/qemu/commits/hmat-noinitiator (rebased on > master 10mn ago). I'm not sure if we take patches from directly from git-forges, I guess it's upto maintainers. CCing Michael, since these should go through his tree > > Do whatever you want with them. I am not allowed to spend more time on this. > > Brice > > >
Re: [PATCH v4 0/4] hmat acpi: Don't require initiator value in -numa
Le 30/06/2022 à 14:23, Igor Mammedov a écrit : On Thu, 30 Jun 2022 09:36:47 +0200 Brice Goglin wrote: Allow -numa without initiator value when hmat=on so that we may build more complex topologies, e.g. NUMA nodes whose best initiators are not just another single node. patches looks fine code-wise, however something wrong with them, i.e. 'git am' doesn't like them nor ./scripts/checkpatch (which one should use before sending patches). I've checked it's not my mail server/client issue(or whatever) that corrupts them (ones downloaded from patchew are broken as well) I don't know what's going on. These 4 patches are in https://github.com/bgoglin/qemu/commits/hmat-noinitiator (rebased on master 10mn ago). Do whatever you want with them. I am not allowed to spend more time on this. Brice OpenPGP_signature Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [PATCH v4 0/4] hmat acpi: Don't require initiator value in -numa
On Thu, 30 Jun 2022 09:36:47 +0200 Brice Goglin wrote: > Allow -numa without initiator value when hmat=on so that we may > build more complex topologies, e.g. NUMA nodes whose best initiators > are not just another single node. > patches looks fine code-wise, however something wrong with them, i.e. 'git am' doesn't like them nor ./scripts/checkpatch (which one should use before sending patches). I've checked it's not my mail server/client issue(or whatever) that corrupts them (ones downloaded from patchew are broken as well) > changes v3->v4 > * use -numa cpu instead of legacy cpus= > changes v2->v3: > * improve messages for patches 0/4 and 3/4 > changes v1->v2: > * add q35 acpi test > > Brice Goglin (4): >hmat acpi: Don't require initiator value in -numa >tests: acpi: add and whitelist *.hmat-noinitiator expected blobs >tests: acpi: q35: add test for hmat nodes without initiators >tests: acpi: q35: update expected blobs *.hmat-noinitiators > > hw/core/machine.c | 4 +- > tests/data/acpi/q35/APIC.acpihmat-noinitiator | Bin 0 -> 144 bytes > tests/data/acpi/q35/DSDT.acpihmat-noinitiator | Bin 0 -> 8553 bytes > tests/data/acpi/q35/FACP.acpihmat-noinitiator | Bin 0 -> 244 bytes > tests/data/acpi/q35/HMAT.acpihmat-noinitiator | Bin 0 -> 288 bytes > tests/data/acpi/q35/SRAT.acpihmat-noinitiator | Bin 0 -> 312 bytes > tests/qtest/bios-tables-test.c| 49 ++ > 7 files changed, 50 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > create mode 100644 tests/data/acpi/q35/APIC.acpihmat-noinitiator > create mode 100644 tests/data/acpi/q35/DSDT.acpihmat-noinitiator > create mode 100644 tests/data/acpi/q35/FACP.acpihmat-noinitiator > create mode 100644 tests/data/acpi/q35/HMAT.acpihmat-noinitiator > create mode 100644 tests/data/acpi/q35/SRAT.acpihmat-noinitiator >
[PATCH v4 0/4] hmat acpi: Don't require initiator value in -numa
Allow -numa without initiator value when hmat=on so that we may build more complex topologies, e.g. NUMA nodes whose best initiators are not just another single node. changes v3->v4 * use -numa cpu instead of legacy cpus= changes v2->v3: * improve messages for patches 0/4 and 3/4 changes v1->v2: * add q35 acpi test Brice Goglin (4): hmat acpi: Don't require initiator value in -numa tests: acpi: add and whitelist *.hmat-noinitiator expected blobs tests: acpi: q35: add test for hmat nodes without initiators tests: acpi: q35: update expected blobs *.hmat-noinitiators hw/core/machine.c | 4 +- tests/data/acpi/q35/APIC.acpihmat-noinitiator | Bin 0 -> 144 bytes tests/data/acpi/q35/DSDT.acpihmat-noinitiator | Bin 0 -> 8553 bytes tests/data/acpi/q35/FACP.acpihmat-noinitiator | Bin 0 -> 244 bytes tests/data/acpi/q35/HMAT.acpihmat-noinitiator | Bin 0 -> 288 bytes tests/data/acpi/q35/SRAT.acpihmat-noinitiator | Bin 0 -> 312 bytes tests/qtest/bios-tables-test.c| 49 ++ 7 files changed, 50 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) create mode 100644 tests/data/acpi/q35/APIC.acpihmat-noinitiator create mode 100644 tests/data/acpi/q35/DSDT.acpihmat-noinitiator create mode 100644 tests/data/acpi/q35/FACP.acpihmat-noinitiator create mode 100644 tests/data/acpi/q35/HMAT.acpihmat-noinitiator create mode 100644 tests/data/acpi/q35/SRAT.acpihmat-noinitiator -- 2.30.2 OpenPGP_signature Description: OpenPGP digital signature
