From: Nina Schoetterl-Glausch <nsg@linux.ibm.com>
To: Pierre Morel <pmorel@linux.ibm.com>,
Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com>,
qemu-s390x@nongnu.org
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, borntraeger@de.ibm.com,
pasic@linux.ibm.com, richard.henderson@linaro.org,
david@redhat.com, cohuck@redhat.com, mst@redhat.com,
pbonzini@redhat.com, kvm@vger.kernel.org, ehabkost@redhat.com,
marcel.apfelbaum@gmail.com, eblake@redhat.com, armbru@redhat.com,
seiden@linux.ibm.com, nrb@linux.ibm.com, frankja@linux.ibm.com,
berrange@redhat.com, clg@kaod.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v14 04/11] s390x/sclp: reporting the maximum nested topology entries
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2023 20:58:15 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <0103e627a835013e00a9c55d46348e76b94366e9.camel@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <22aff83d-4379-e4f0-9826-33f986ddeec7@linux.ibm.com>
On Tue, 2023-01-17 at 18:36 +0100, Pierre Morel wrote:
>
> On 1/11/23 09:57, Thomas Huth wrote:
> > On 05/01/2023 15.53, Pierre Morel wrote:
> > > The maximum nested topology entries is used by the guest to know
> > > how many nested topology are available on the machine.
> > >
> > > Currently, SCLP READ SCP INFO reports MNEST = 0, which is the
> > > equivalent of reporting the default value of 2.
> > > Let's use the default SCLP value of 2 and increase this value in the
> > > future patches implementing higher levels.
> >
> > I'm confused ... so does a SCLP value of 2 mean a MNEST level of 4 ?
>
> Sorry, I forgot to change this.
> MNEST = 0 means no MNEST support and only socket is supported so it is
> like MNEST = 2.
> MNEST != 0 set the maximum nested level and correct values may be 2,3 or 4.
> But this setting to 4 should already have been done in previous patch
> where we introduced the books and drawers.
I think setting it to 4 here is fine/preferable, since 2 is the default unless
you tell the guest that more are available, which you do in this patch.
It's only the commit description that is confusing.
>
> I change the commit message with:
> ---
> s390x/sclp: reporting the maximum nested topology entries
>
> The maximum nested topology entries is used by the guest to know
> how many nested topology are available on the machine.
>
> Let's return this information to the guest.
> ---
>
> >
> > > Signed-off-by: Pierre Morel <pmorel@linux.ibm.com>
> > > ---
> > > include/hw/s390x/sclp.h | 5 +++--
> > > hw/s390x/sclp.c | 4 ++++
> > > 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/include/hw/s390x/sclp.h b/include/hw/s390x/sclp.h
> > > index 712fd68123..4ce852473c 100644
> > > --- a/include/hw/s390x/sclp.h
> > > +++ b/include/hw/s390x/sclp.h
> > > @@ -112,12 +112,13 @@ typedef struct CPUEntry {
> > > } QEMU_PACKED CPUEntry;
> > > #define SCLP_READ_SCP_INFO_FIXED_CPU_OFFSET 128
> > > -#define SCLP_READ_SCP_INFO_MNEST 2
> > > +#define SCLP_READ_SCP_INFO_MNEST 4
> >
> > ... since you update it to 4 here.
>
> Yes, in fact this should be set in the previous patch already to 4.
> So I will do that.
>
> >
> > > typedef struct ReadInfo {
> > > SCCBHeader h;
> > > uint16_t rnmax;
> > > uint8_t rnsize;
> > > - uint8_t _reserved1[16 - 11]; /* 11-15 */
> > > + uint8_t _reserved1[15 - 11]; /* 11-14 */
> > > + uint8_t stsi_parm; /* 15-16 */
> > > uint16_t entries_cpu; /* 16-17 */
> > > uint16_t offset_cpu; /* 18-19 */
> > > uint8_t _reserved2[24 - 20]; /* 20-23 */
> > > diff --git a/hw/s390x/sclp.c b/hw/s390x/sclp.c
> > > index eff74479f4..07e3cb4cac 100644
> > > --- a/hw/s390x/sclp.c
> > > +++ b/hw/s390x/sclp.c
> > > @@ -20,6 +20,7 @@
> > > #include "hw/s390x/event-facility.h"
> > > #include "hw/s390x/s390-pci-bus.h"
> > > #include "hw/s390x/ipl.h"
> > > +#include "hw/s390x/cpu-topology.h"
> > > static inline SCLPDevice *get_sclp_device(void)
> > > {
> > > @@ -125,6 +126,9 @@ static void read_SCP_info(SCLPDevice *sclp, SCCB
> > > *sccb)
> > > /* CPU information */
> > > prepare_cpu_entries(machine, entries_start, &cpu_count);
> > > + if (s390_has_topology()) {
> > > + read_info->stsi_parm = SCLP_READ_SCP_INFO_MNEST;
> >
> > This seems to be in contradiction to what you've said in the commit
> > description - you set it to 4 and not to 2.
>
> Yes, I change the commit message.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Regards,
> Pierre
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-01-17 21:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 79+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-01-05 14:53 [PATCH v14 00/11] s390x: CPU Topology Pierre Morel
2023-01-05 14:53 ` [PATCH v14 01/11] s390x/cpu topology: adding s390 specificities to CPU topology Pierre Morel
2023-01-10 11:37 ` Thomas Huth
2023-01-16 16:32 ` Pierre Morel
2023-01-17 7:25 ` Thomas Huth
2023-01-13 16:58 ` Nina Schoetterl-Glausch
2023-01-16 17:28 ` Pierre Morel
2023-01-16 20:34 ` Nina Schoetterl-Glausch
2023-01-17 9:49 ` Pierre Morel
2023-01-17 7:22 ` Thomas Huth
2023-01-05 14:53 ` [PATCH v14 02/11] s390x/cpu topology: add topology entries on CPU hotplug Pierre Morel
2023-01-10 13:00 ` Thomas Huth
2023-01-11 9:23 ` Nina Schoetterl-Glausch
2023-01-16 18:24 ` Pierre Morel
2023-01-13 18:15 ` Nina Schoetterl-Glausch
2023-01-17 13:55 ` Pierre Morel
2023-01-17 16:48 ` Nina Schoetterl-Glausch
2023-01-19 13:34 ` Pierre Morel
2023-01-05 14:53 ` [PATCH v14 03/11] target/s390x/cpu topology: handle STSI(15) and build the SYSIB Pierre Morel
2023-01-10 14:29 ` Thomas Huth
2023-01-11 9:16 ` Thomas Huth
2023-01-11 17:14 ` Nina Schoetterl-Glausch
2023-01-17 16:58 ` Pierre Morel
2023-01-17 16:56 ` Pierre Morel
2023-01-18 10:26 ` Thomas Huth
2023-01-18 11:54 ` Nina Schoetterl-Glausch
2023-01-19 13:12 ` Pierre Morel
2023-01-16 13:11 ` Nina Schoetterl-Glausch
2023-01-16 15:39 ` Pierre Morel
2023-01-05 14:53 ` [PATCH v14 04/11] s390x/sclp: reporting the maximum nested topology entries Pierre Morel
2023-01-11 8:57 ` Thomas Huth
2023-01-17 17:36 ` Pierre Morel
2023-01-17 19:58 ` Nina Schoetterl-Glausch [this message]
2023-01-19 13:08 ` Pierre Morel
2023-01-11 17:52 ` Nina Schoetterl-Glausch
2023-01-17 17:44 ` Pierre Morel
2023-01-05 14:53 ` [PATCH v14 05/11] s390x/cpu topology: resetting the Topology-Change-Report Pierre Morel
2023-01-11 9:00 ` Thomas Huth
2023-01-17 17:57 ` Pierre Morel
2023-01-05 14:53 ` [PATCH v14 06/11] s390x/cpu topology: interception of PTF instruction Pierre Morel
2023-01-16 18:24 ` Nina Schoetterl-Glausch
2023-01-18 9:54 ` Pierre Morel
2023-01-20 14:32 ` Pierre Morel
2023-01-05 14:53 ` [PATCH v14 07/11] target/s390x/cpu topology: activating CPU topology Pierre Morel
2023-01-11 10:04 ` Thomas Huth
2023-01-18 10:01 ` Pierre Morel
2023-01-05 14:53 ` [PATCH v14 08/11] qapi/s390/cpu topology: change-topology monitor command Pierre Morel
2023-01-11 10:09 ` Thomas Huth
2023-01-12 8:00 ` Thomas Huth
2023-01-18 14:23 ` Pierre Morel
2023-01-12 12:03 ` Daniel P. Berrangé
2023-01-18 13:17 ` Pierre Morel
2023-01-16 21:09 ` Nina Schoetterl-Glausch
2023-01-17 7:30 ` Thomas Huth
2023-01-17 13:31 ` Nina Schoetterl-Glausch
2023-01-18 10:53 ` Thomas Huth
2023-01-18 14:09 ` Pierre Morel
2023-01-18 15:17 ` Kevin Wolf
2023-01-18 15:48 ` Pierre Morel
2023-01-18 14:06 ` Pierre Morel
2023-01-05 14:53 ` [PATCH v14 09/11] qapi/s390/cpu topology: monitor query topology information Pierre Morel
2023-01-12 11:48 ` Thomas Huth
2023-01-18 15:59 ` Pierre Morel
2023-01-12 12:10 ` Daniel P. Berrangé
2023-01-12 17:27 ` Nina Schoetterl-Glausch
2023-01-12 17:30 ` Daniel P. Berrangé
2023-01-18 15:58 ` Pierre Morel
2023-01-18 16:08 ` Daniel P. Berrangé
2023-01-18 16:57 ` Pierre Morel
2023-01-05 14:53 ` [PATCH v14 10/11] qapi/s390/cpu topology: POLARITY_CHANGE qapi event Pierre Morel
2023-01-12 11:52 ` Thomas Huth
2023-01-18 17:09 ` Pierre Morel
2023-01-20 11:56 ` Thomas Huth
2023-01-20 14:22 ` Pierre Morel
2023-01-05 14:53 ` [PATCH v14 11/11] docs/s390x/cpu topology: document s390x cpu topology Pierre Morel
2023-01-12 11:46 ` Thomas Huth
2023-01-19 14:48 ` Pierre Morel
2023-01-12 11:58 ` Daniel P. Berrangé
2023-01-18 17:10 ` Pierre Morel
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=0103e627a835013e00a9c55d46348e76b94366e9.camel@linux.ibm.com \
--to=nsg@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=armbru@redhat.com \
--cc=berrange@redhat.com \
--cc=borntraeger@de.ibm.com \
--cc=clg@kaod.org \
--cc=cohuck@redhat.com \
--cc=david@redhat.com \
--cc=eblake@redhat.com \
--cc=ehabkost@redhat.com \
--cc=frankja@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=marcel.apfelbaum@gmail.com \
--cc=mst@redhat.com \
--cc=nrb@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=pasic@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=pmorel@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=qemu-s390x@nongnu.org \
--cc=richard.henderson@linaro.org \
--cc=seiden@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=thuth@redhat.com \
/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