Re: [Qemu-devel] [patch] Introduce per machine based max_cpu variable

[Jes Sorensen <jes@sgi.com>]

>>>>> "Anthony" == Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws> writes:

Anthony> If it were 'max_cpu' then the meaning is pretty clear.  On a
Anthony> UP system, the max_cpu is 0.

Well it depends on how you calculate it, it is meant as max_nr_cpus
which IMHO is the most clear. If you prefer, I can rename it to that.
Most users will think in terms of 'number of cpus to enable' rather
than the highest logical cpu number.

Anthony> You could also make it max_aps which makes it even more
Anthony> clear.  A UP system doesn't have any APs.

What do you mean by AP?

Anthony> The other option is to have max_cpus == 0 be equivalent to
Anthony> max_cpus == 1.  But don't print anything.  Basically, I don't
Anthony> like the idea of modifying every machine definition when they
Anthony> all have almost the exact same value for the field.

I really don't understand this - the code as it is today is really
inconsistent. What my patch does is simply to make it explicit what it
does and make it consistent. I have taken great care to do it in a
way, so if in the unlikely situation it breaks an existing behavior,
it will be very clear what is wrong and how to fix it. I'll even be
willing to put my name in there and volunteer to fix it up for people
if this actually happens :-)

Cheers,
Jes