[PATCH v9 4/6] qtest/numa-test: Correct CPU and NUMA association in aarch64_numa_cpu()

[Gavin Shan <gshan@redhat.com>]

In aarch64_numa_cpu(), the CPU and NUMA association is something
like below. Two threads in the same core/cluster/socket are
associated with two individual NUMA nodes, which is unreal as
Igor Mammedov mentioned. We don't expect the association to break
NUMA-to-socket boundary, which matches with the real world.

    NUMA-node  socket  cluster   core   thread
    ------------------------------------------
        0       0        0        0      0
        1       0        0        0      1

This corrects the topology for CPUs and their association with
NUMA nodes. After this patch is applied, the CPU and NUMA
association becomes something like below, which looks real.
Besides, socket/cluster/core/thread IDs are all checked when
the NUMA node IDs are verified. It helps to check if the CPU
topology is properly populated or not.

    NUMA-node  socket  cluster   core   thread
    ------------------------------------------
       0        1        0        0       0
       1        0        0        0       0

Suggested-by: Igor Mammedov <imammedo@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Gavin Shan <gshan@redhat.com>
---
 tests/qtest/numa-test.c | 18 ++++++++++++------
 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/tests/qtest/numa-test.c b/tests/qtest/numa-test.c
index aeda8c774c..32e35daaae 100644
--- a/tests/qtest/numa-test.c
+++ b/tests/qtest/numa-test.c
@@ -224,17 +224,17 @@ static void aarch64_numa_cpu(const void *data)
     g_autofree char *cli = NULL;
 
     cli = make_cli(data, "-machine "
-        "smp.cpus=2,smp.sockets=1,smp.clusters=1,smp.cores=1,smp.threads=2 "
+        "smp.cpus=2,smp.sockets=2,smp.clusters=1,smp.cores=1,smp.threads=1 "
         "-numa node,nodeid=0,memdev=ram -numa node,nodeid=1 "
-        "-numa cpu,node-id=1,thread-id=0 "
-        "-numa cpu,node-id=0,thread-id=1");
+        "-numa cpu,node-id=0,socket-id=1,cluster-id=0,core-id=0,thread-id=0 "
+        "-numa cpu,node-id=1,socket-id=0,cluster-id=0,core-id=0,thread-id=0");
     qts = qtest_init(cli);
     cpus = get_cpus(qts, &resp);
     g_assert(cpus);
 
     while ((e = qlist_pop(cpus))) {
         QDict *cpu, *props;
-        int64_t thread, node;
+        int64_t socket, cluster, core, thread, node;
 
         cpu = qobject_to(QDict, e);
         g_assert(qdict_haskey(cpu, "props"));
@@ -242,12 +242,18 @@ static void aarch64_numa_cpu(const void *data)
 
         g_assert(qdict_haskey(props, "node-id"));
         node = qdict_get_int(props, "node-id");
+        g_assert(qdict_haskey(props, "socket-id"));
+        socket = qdict_get_int(props, "socket-id");
+        g_assert(qdict_haskey(props, "cluster-id"));
+        cluster = qdict_get_int(props, "cluster-id");
+        g_assert(qdict_haskey(props, "core-id"));
+        core = qdict_get_int(props, "core-id");
         g_assert(qdict_haskey(props, "thread-id"));
         thread = qdict_get_int(props, "thread-id");
 
-        if (thread == 0) {
+        if (socket == 0 && cluster == 0 && core == 0 && thread == 0) {
             g_assert_cmpint(node, ==, 1);
-        } else if (thread == 1) {
+        } else if (socket == 1 && cluster == 0 && core == 0 && thread == 0) {
             g_assert_cmpint(node, ==, 0);
         } else {
             g_assert(false);
-- 
2.23.0