From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:48045)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <aik@ozlabs.ru>) id 1WyBg0-0000jl-PK
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 20 Jun 2014 23:09:20 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <aik@ozlabs.ru>) id 1WyBft-0005Dp-8x
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 20 Jun 2014 23:09:12 -0400
Received: from mail-pa0-f47.google.com ([209.85.220.47]:35183)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <aik@ozlabs.ru>) id 1WyBft-0005Db-2l
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 20 Jun 2014 23:09:05 -0400
Received: by mail-pa0-f47.google.com with SMTP id kq14so3739084pab.20
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Fri, 20 Jun 2014 20:09:04 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <53A4F74B.6080607@ozlabs.ru>
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2014 13:08:59 +1000
From: Alexey Kardashevskiy <aik@ozlabs.ru>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1402905233-26510-1-git-send-email-aik@ozlabs.ru>
	<1402905233-26510-4-git-send-email-aik@ozlabs.ru>
	<20140620191000.GX16644@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
In-Reply-To: <20140620191000.GX16644@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=KOI8-R
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 3/7] spapr: Refactor spapr_populate_memory()
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Nishanth Aravamudan <nacc@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: qemu-ppc@nongnu.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Alexander Graf <agraf@suse.de>

On 06/21/2014 05:10 AM, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
> On 16.06.2014 [17:53:49 +1000], Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
>> Current QEMU does not support memoryless NUMA nodes.
>> This prepares SPAPR for that.
>>
>> This moves 2 calls of spapr_populate_memory_node() into
>> the existing loop which handles nodes other than than
>> the first one.
> 
> <snip>
> 
>> @@ -719,6 +704,12 @@ static int spapr_populate_memory(sPAPREnvironment *spapr, void *fdt)
>>                  node_size = ram_size - mem_start;
>>              }
>>          }
>> +        if (!mem_start) {
>> +            /* ppc_spapr_init() checks for rma_size <= node0_size already */
>> +            spapr_populate_memory_node(fdt, i, 0, spapr->rma_size);
>> +            mem_start += spapr->rma_size;
>> +            node_size -= spapr->rma_size;
>> +        }
> 
> Why is this needed to be separate? The RMA fits in the first node, per
> the comment and the prior checks, so can't we just leave the first node
> alone?

This is the way to tell SLOF what memory it can use. It can use RMA and it
will use first available memory node.



-- 
Alexey