From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:50468) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bsQSu-0000GW-D4 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 07 Oct 2016 04:25:22 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bsQSi-0002cU-9J for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 07 Oct 2016 04:25:11 -0400 Received: from 8.mo1.mail-out.ovh.net ([178.33.110.239]:44662) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bsQSi-0002b0-3X for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 07 Oct 2016 04:25:00 -0400 Received: from player726.ha.ovh.net (b7.ovh.net [213.186.33.57]) by mo1.mail-out.ovh.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 12DC112DA3 for ; Fri, 7 Oct 2016 10:24:58 +0200 (CEST) References: <1475479496-16158-1-git-send-email-clg@kaod.org> <1475479496-16158-4-git-send-email-clg@kaod.org> <20161007043221.GS18490@umbus.fritz.box> <1475816512.3784.244.camel@kernel.crashing.org> <20161007051101.GW18490@umbus.fritz.box> From: =?UTF-8?Q?C=c3=a9dric_Le_Goater?= Message-ID: <09221a19-e316-ae3c-b57c-385033ead81f@kaod.org> Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2016 10:24:53 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20161007051101.GW18490@umbus.fritz.box> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v4 03/20] ppc/pnv: add a core mask to PnvChip List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: David Gibson , Benjamin Herrenschmidt Cc: qemu-ppc@nongnu.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org On 10/07/2016 07:11 AM, David Gibson wrote: > On Fri, Oct 07, 2016 at 04:01:52PM +1100, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: >> On Fri, 2016-10-07 at 15:32 +1100, David Gibson wrote: >>> On Mon, Oct 03, 2016 at 09:24:39AM +0200, C=E9dric Le Goater wrote: >>>> This will be used to build real HW ids for the cores and enforce >>> some >>>> limits on the available cores per chip. >>> >>> Is there actually a practical reason to allow the user (or machine >>> type) to override the default core mask? >> >> None other than mimmicing real HW ... some cores can be disabled >> on some chips and we *might* want to mimmic that for some test >> scenarios. >=20 > Ok, sounds like a good enough reason to me. There are really different layouts on the field. Here is a S824, 16 cores, 4 sockets, with these HW ids : 0x4 0x4 0x5 0x4 0x5 0x5 0xc 0x5 0x6 0x6 0xd 0x6 0xe 0xe 0xe 0xd Long term, we will want to support unplug I suppose. =09 C.