From: Igor Mammedov <imammedo@redhat.com>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: damien.hedde@greensocs.com, edgar.iglesias@xilinx.com,
Mirela Grujic <mirela.grujic@greensocs.com>,
mark.burton@greensocs.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/9] Initial support for machine creation via QMP
Date: Mon, 24 May 2021 20:27:50 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210524202750.63af5557@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <a734314b-e495-550b-9a01-40e9e75f6b8f@redhat.com>
On Fri, 21 May 2021 18:57:36 +0200
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 21/05/21 16:06, Mirela Grujic wrote:
> >>
> >> PHASE_NO_MACHINE
> >> -> machine-set -> PHASE_MACHINE_CREATED ->
> >> -> accel-set -> PHASE_ACCEL_CREATED -> PHASE_MACHINE_INITIALIZED ->
> >
> >
> > My understanding is that an equivalent of previously supported
> > 'preconfig' state is PHASE_ACCEL_CREATED, from the perspective of the
> > QMP configuration that Igor implemented. In other words, I believe that
> > when -preconfig CLI option was passed, QEMU was waiting for the QMP
> > configuration in PHASE_ACCEL_CREATED phase. Now, if accel-set advances
> > the machine directly to PHASE_MACHINE_INITIALIZED, there will be no
> > chance to configure what Igor did with -preconfig.
>
> Right, that was only NUMA. I have to check, but I think it can be moved
> to PHASE_MACHINE_CREATED.
Dependency for NUMA were:
1: -smp/-cpu being parsed before set_numa_options QMP command is called
it's necessary to for machine being able to provide topology for
given -smp combination.
-cpu is not must have dependency (currently), it was just conveniently
available when building topology in possible_cpu_arch_ids(), setting
cpu-type there could be deffered to the later time (actual user for
CPU type is QMP command query-hotpluggable-cpus, so that user could know
what cpu type and what properties to use with device_add at hot-add time).
2: memory backends depended on accel (TCG)
(I think, Paolo has removed that dependency)
> Apart from that, if we add a third command for the CPU model, that third
> command would run from PHASE_ACCEL_CREATED so the pre-existing preconfig
> state would be accessible.
>
> Paolo
>
> > Is this something you don't want to support anymore, or it can be
> > configured in another way? Or is this something that we haven't thought
> > of yet, but we should?
>
>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-05-24 18:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-05-13 8:25 [RFC PATCH 0/9] Initial support for machine creation via QMP Mirela Grujic
2021-05-13 8:25 ` [RFC PATCH 1/9] vl: Allow finer control in advancing machine through phases Mirela Grujic
2021-05-13 8:25 ` [RFC PATCH 2/9] replace machine phase_check with machine_is_initialized/ready calls Mirela Grujic
2021-05-13 17:46 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-05-14 13:13 ` Mirela Grujic
2021-05-14 21:14 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-06-07 16:03 ` Eric Blake
2021-05-13 8:25 ` [RFC PATCH 3/9] rename MachineInitPhase enumeration constants Mirela Grujic
2021-05-13 8:25 ` [RFC PATCH 4/9] qapi: Implement 'query-machine-phase' command Mirela Grujic
2021-05-13 17:44 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-05-19 15:43 ` Daniel P. Berrangé
2021-05-13 8:25 ` [RFC PATCH 5/9] qapi: Implement 'next-machine-phase' command Mirela Grujic
2021-06-04 14:25 ` Eric Blake
2021-06-05 14:40 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-05-13 8:25 ` [RFC PATCH 6/9] qapi: Implement 'advance-machine-phase' command Mirela Grujic
2021-05-19 15:37 ` Kevin Wolf
2021-05-13 8:25 ` [RFC PATCH 7/9] qdev-monitor: Restructure and fix the check for command availability Mirela Grujic
2021-05-13 17:43 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-05-14 13:00 ` Mirela Grujic
2021-05-13 8:25 ` [RFC PATCH 8/9] qapi: Introduce 'allow-init-config' option Mirela Grujic
2021-05-13 8:25 ` [RFC PATCH 9/9] qapi: Allow some commands to be executed in machine 'initialized' phase Mirela Grujic
2021-05-13 17:52 ` [RFC PATCH 0/9] Initial support for machine creation via QMP Paolo Bonzini
2021-05-14 12:48 ` Mirela Grujic
2021-05-14 16:00 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-05-14 16:20 ` Daniel P. Berrangé
2021-05-14 18:32 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-05-24 17:20 ` Igor Mammedov
2021-05-24 19:05 ` Igor Mammedov
2021-05-21 11:32 ` Markus Armbruster
2021-05-21 17:02 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-05-21 14:06 ` Mirela Grujic
2021-05-21 16:57 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-05-24 18:27 ` Igor Mammedov [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20210524202750.63af5557@redhat.com \
--to=imammedo@redhat.com \
--cc=damien.hedde@greensocs.com \
--cc=edgar.iglesias@xilinx.com \
--cc=mark.burton@greensocs.com \
--cc=mirela.grujic@greensocs.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).