From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:42854) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1d5wvA-0001lB-5l for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 03 May 2017 12:14:33 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1d5wv9-00009p-Aw for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 03 May 2017 12:14:32 -0400 Date: Wed, 3 May 2017 18:14:21 +0200 From: Igor Mammedov Message-ID: <20170503181421.06ea4fcb@nial.brq.redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <20170503145935.GN3482@thinpad.lan.raisama.net> References: <1493816238-33120-1-git-send-email-imammedo@redhat.com> <1493816238-33120-6-git-send-email-imammedo@redhat.com> <20170503145935.GN3482@thinpad.lan.raisama.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 05/24] numa: move source of default CPUs to NUMA node mapping into boards List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Eduardo Habkost Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Peter Maydell , Andrew Jones , David Gibson , Eric Blake , Paolo Bonzini , Shannon Zhao , qemu-arm@nongnu.org, qemu-ppc@nongnu.org On Wed, 3 May 2017 11:59:35 -0300 Eduardo Habkost wrote: > On Wed, May 03, 2017 at 02:56:59PM +0200, Igor Mammedov wrote: > [...] > > @@ -378,14 +379,16 @@ void parse_numa_opts(MachineClass *mc) > > * rule grouping VCPUs by socket so that VCPUs from the same socket > > * would be on the same node. > > */ > > + if (!mc->cpu_index_to_instance_props) { > > + error_report("default CPUs to NUMA node mapping isn't supported"); > > + exit(1); > > + } > > This will make people trying to use -numa on unsupported machines > see a misleading error message: instead of telling them that the > machine doesn't support NUMA at all, the message seems to imply > that NUMA may be supported and we just don't have default NUMA node > mapping support. > > Probably a more generic "NUMA is not supported by this > machine-type" message before even trying to parse -numa would be > clearer. (I don't know if another patch in this series already > does that.) no, other places should error out with other error messages if it's not supported.