From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E2B4C433DF for ; Wed, 27 May 2020 09:53:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4AB3620B80 for ; Wed, 27 May 2020 09:53:00 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="eWJIqzSY" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 4AB3620B80 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Received: from localhost ([::1]:36686 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jdsk7-0003UC-GZ for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Wed, 27 May 2020 05:52:59 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:47770) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jdsim-0002Fa-L1 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 27 May 2020 05:51:36 -0400 Received: from us-smtp-2.mimecast.com ([207.211.31.81]:47667 helo=us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jdsil-0000xG-Ft for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 27 May 2020 05:51:36 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1590573094; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=M0dAXNDQQ7XY7xee0kvINI/xiMyDCx/uG05SWgKOSh8=; b=eWJIqzSY2sfxA8MPrmV2AsvD16qBFAGOlgj2yw05LGyQ5tDgZ20CN0Uv20txa5YRYYBcPD SL9XmUQfkQpDk+IY9cPZn47j3vivxK70tXYz8xtdzFeSYA20bdYn1EoB6CD4V+fFPGCPLO 4OG/oQF1o1ulu3DSfuU6fn63+SMolB0= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-51-Z5lKdVBsM8uO7ec5nHlBAw-1; Wed, 27 May 2020 05:51:30 -0400 X-MC-Unique: Z5lKdVBsM8uO7ec5nHlBAw-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.12]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0BC70835B8D; Wed, 27 May 2020 09:51:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from redhat.com (unknown [10.36.110.50]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 74E6960C05; Wed, 27 May 2020 09:51:26 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 27 May 2020 10:51:23 +0100 From: Daniel =?utf-8?B?UC4gQmVycmFuZ8Op?= To: Anup Patel Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/5] hw: Add sockets_specified field in CpuTopology Message-ID: <20200527095123.GH2665520@redhat.com> References: <20200527054226.232103-1-anup.patel@wdc.com> <20200527054226.232103-2-anup.patel@wdc.com> <20200527084554.GC2665520@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.13.4 (2020-02-15) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.12 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Disposition: inline Received-SPF: pass client-ip=207.211.31.81; envelope-from=berrange@redhat.com; helo=us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: First seen = 2020/05/27 00:45:05 X-ACL-Warn: Detected OS = Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] [fuzzy] X-Spam_score_int: -10 X-Spam_score: -1.1 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FROM_EXCESS_BASE64=0.979, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001 autolearn=_AUTOLEARN X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: Daniel =?utf-8?B?UC4gQmVycmFuZ8Op?= Cc: Peter Maydell , "qemu-riscv@nongnu.org" , Eduardo Habkost , Sagar Karandikar , Anup Patel , "qemu-devel@nongnu.org" , Atish Patra , Alistair Francis , Palmer Dabbelt Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 09:48:39AM +0000, Anup Patel wrote: > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Daniel P. Berrangé > > Sent: 27 May 2020 14:16 > > To: Anup Patel > > Cc: Eduardo Habkost ; Marcel Apfelbaum > > ; Peter Maydell ; > > Palmer Dabbelt ; Alistair Francis > > ; Sagar Karandikar ; > > Atish Patra ; qemu-riscv@nongnu.org; qemu- > > devel@nongnu.org; Anup Patel > > Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/5] hw: Add sockets_specified field in CpuTopology > > > > On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 11:12:22AM +0530, Anup Patel wrote: > > > When "sockets" sub-option of "-smp" option is not specified, the > > > smp_parse() function will assume one CPU per-socket and set the number > > > of sockets equal to number of CPUs. > > > > > > This is counter-intuitive and we should allow machine emulation to > > > decide default number of sockets when "sockets" sub-option is not > > > specified. > > > > I don't agree with this. Having the semantics of the -smp option be the same > > across all targets/machines *is* intuitive. Changing semantics of -smp per- > > machine will create a worse experiance for people configuring QEMU as the > > configuration will mean different things depending on the machine choce. > > Okay then why don't we default to sockets=1 in smp_parse() when "sockets" > sub-options is not specified ?? This will make it uniform across machines. > > Is there a reason to by default have sockets=max_cpus ?? IIUC both of these questions are due to backwards compatibility with pre-existing QEMU versions. Regards, Daniel -- |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :| |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|