From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:57308) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dyvSP-0001J7-Nz for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 02 Oct 2017 03:48:08 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dyvSM-0003d2-Mi for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 02 Oct 2017 03:48:05 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:52710) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dyvSM-0003cU-Gp for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 02 Oct 2017 03:48:02 -0400 From: Markus Armbruster References: <20170913132417.24384-1-david@redhat.com> <20170913185827.1f7790f2.cohuck@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 02 Oct 2017 09:47:58 +0200 In-Reply-To: <20170913185827.1f7790f2.cohuck@redhat.com> (Cornelia Huck's message of "Wed, 13 Sep 2017 18:58:27 +0200") Message-ID: <87fub2q9ch.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v5 00/22] s390x cleanups and CPU hotplug via device_add List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Cornelia Huck Cc: David Hildenbrand , Matthew Rosato , thuth@redhat.com, Eduardo Habkost , Richard Henderson , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Alexander Graf , borntraeger@de.ibm.com, Igor Mammedov , Paolo Bonzini List-ID: Cornelia Huck writes: > On Wed, 13 Sep 2017 15:23:55 +0200 > David Hildenbrand wrote: > >> The first patches are a bunch of cleanups. I decided to go the >> extra mile and implement CPU hotplug via "device_add", as well as >> "query-hotpluggable-cpus". >> >> On s390x, only complete cores can be plugged. CPU hot unplug is currently >> not supported by the architecture. >> >> Support for hotplugging CPUs in random core-id order (last two patches) >> is added. We once hat a KVM bug preventing this, but the stable patch >> should now be included in relevant places - 152e9f65d66f ("KVM: s390: fix >> wrong lookup of VCPUs by array index"). Current tooling will plug them in >> sequential order anyway, so it should not hurt. > > Thanks, applied. Please squash in the one-liner fix I asked for in my (late!) review of PATCH 18.