From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:33198) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dkZP7-00071j-SG for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 23 Aug 2017 13:25:22 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dkZP3-0002Rh-9X for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 23 Aug 2017 13:25:21 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:40406) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dkZP3-0002RB-0N for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 23 Aug 2017 13:25:17 -0400 Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2017 14:25:11 -0300 From: Eduardo Habkost Message-ID: <20170823172511.GR19998@localhost.localdomain> References: <1503372250-5092-1-git-send-email-douly.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com> <1503372250-5092-3-git-send-email-douly.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com> <20170823104051.36488fcb@nial.brq.redhat.com> <9b19623e-55e9-ebac-11d3-6ff5fff176fe@cn.fujitsu.com> <20170823144502.17203857@nial.brq.redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v4 2/2] ACPI/unit-test: Add a new testcase for RAM allocation in numa node List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Dou Liyang Cc: Igor Mammedov , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, pbonzini@redhat.com, rth@twiddle.net, mst@redhat.com On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 09:35:29PM +0800, Dou Liyang wrote: > Hi Igor, >=20 > At 08/23/2017 08:45 PM, Igor Mammedov wrote: > > On Wed, 23 Aug 2017 20:12:51 +0800 > > Dou Liyang wrote: > >=20 > > > Hi Igor, > > >=20 > > > At 08/23/2017 04:40 PM, Igor Mammedov wrote: > > > > On Tue, 22 Aug 2017 11:24:10 +0800 > > > > Dou Liyang wrote: > > > >=20 > > > > > As QEMU supports the memory-less node, it is possible that ther= e is > > > > > no RAM in the first numa node(also be called as node0). eg: > > > > > ... \ > > > > > -m 128,slots=3D3,maxmem=3D1G \ > > > > > -numa node -numa node,mem=3D128M \ > > > > >=20 > > > > > But, this makes it hard for QEMU to build a known-to-work ACPI = SRAT > > > > > table. Only fixing it is not enough. > > > > >=20 > > > > > Add a testcase for this situation to make sure the ACPI table i= s > > > > > correct for guest. > > > > >=20 > > > > > Suggested-by: Eduardo Habkost > > > > > Signed-off-by: Dou Liyang > > > > > --- > > > > > tests/acpi-test-data/pc/DSDT.numamem | Bin 0 -> 6463 bytes > > > > > tests/acpi-test-data/pc/SLIT.numamem | Bin 0 -> 48 bytes > > > > > tests/acpi-test-data/pc/SRAT.numamem | Bin 0 -> 264 bytes > > > > > tests/acpi-test-data/q35/DSDT.numamem | Bin 0 -> 9147 bytes > > > > > tests/acpi-test-data/q35/SLIT.numamem | Bin 0 -> 48 bytes > > > > > tests/acpi-test-data/q35/SRAT.numamem | Bin 0 -> 264 bytes > > > > > tests/bios-tables-test.c | 30 ++++++++++++++++++= ++++++++++++ > > > > > 7 files changed, 30 insertions(+) > > > > > create mode 100644 tests/acpi-test-data/pc/DSDT.numamem > > > > > create mode 100644 tests/acpi-test-data/pc/SLIT.numamem > > > > > create mode 100644 tests/acpi-test-data/pc/SRAT.numamem > > > > > create mode 100644 tests/acpi-test-data/q35/DSDT.numamem > > > > > create mode 100644 tests/acpi-test-data/q35/SLIT.numamem > > > > > create mode 100644 tests/acpi-test-data/q35/SRAT.numamem > > > >=20 > > > >=20 > > > > considering only SRAT table has been changed and the other > > > > tables match with default blobs, I'd suggest to keep only > > >=20 > > >=20 > > > Our testcase is=EF=BC=9A > > >=20 > > > + test_acpi_one(" -m 128,slots=3D3,maxmem=3D1G" > > > + " -numa node -numa node,mem=3D128" > > > + " -numa dist,src=3D0,dst=3D1,val=3D21", > > > + &data); > > >=20 > > > The DSDT and SLIT don't match with default blobs. > > do you actually need SLIT table /i.e. -numa dist/ for test at all? > > it looks not relevant for the test case at the hand, > > I'd suggest to drop '-numa dist' option for the test. > >=20 >=20 > OK, Got it, will drop '-numa dist' option in next version. >=20 > > >=20 > > > So, they can't be dropped. > >=20 > > I wonder what's changed, could you post DSDT diff here? > >=20 >=20 > Just like memory hot-plug cases, when we use the '-m > 128,slots=3D3,maxmem=3D1G' option, As the ACPI spec said, There may be = some > Memory Device in the DSDT table. Do you really need to use -m 128,slots=3D3,maxmem=3D1G to test your bug fix? --=20 Eduardo