From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1MQg5F-0006vv-NZ
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 14 Jul 2009 07:22:05 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1MQg5A-0006nq-Gu
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 14 Jul 2009 07:22:04 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=47262 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MQg5A-0006nb-5V
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 14 Jul 2009 07:22:00 -0400
Received: from relay3.sgi.com ([192.48.156.57]:51571 helo=relay.sgi.com)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <jes@sgi.com>) id 1MQg59-0004B1-Sz
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 14 Jul 2009 07:22:00 -0400
Message-ID: <4A5C6A4E.8010201@sgi.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2009 13:21:50 +0200
From: Jes Sorensen <jes@sgi.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [patch 2/2] QEMU BOCHS bios patches to use maxcpus
	value.
References: <20090624083512.766907560@sgi.com>	
	<20090624083725.264462154@sgi.com>
	<4A5667D2.2020404@codemonkey.ws>	 <4A5C43E9.7010804@sgi.com>
	<5b31733c0907140221l3c2b6b3an1e5ebf79eaeef703@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <5b31733c0907140221l3c2b6b3an1e5ebf79eaeef703@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Filip Navara <filip.navara@gmail.com>
Cc: Anthony Liguori <aliguori@us.ibm.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>

On 07/14/2009 11:21 AM, Filip Navara wrote:
> BTW, many other guests complain when ACPI describes more processors
> than actually present in machine. That's why I implemented the dynamic
> DSDT generation in Bochs BIOS in the first place. One that comes to
> mind is MacOS X, or the Darwin kernel respectively.

Hi Filip,

As Gleb mentioned, this is pretty common behavior on real hardware. Most
of the boards I have here, declare the maximum number of possible CPUs,
even when they are not all active (like if you disable hyper threading).

I like the idea of dynamic declerations, but it's problematic as the
ACPI code gets more complicated.

I'd like to try and find out what broke in Anthony's case.

Cheers,
Jes