From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1Ki7Oc-00046N-7o
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 23 Sep 2008 08:53:38 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1Ki7Ob-000466-FL
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 23 Sep 2008 08:53:37 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=58767 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ki7Ob-000463-9T
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 23 Sep 2008 08:53:37 -0400
Received: from relay2.sgi.com ([192.48.171.30]:38411 helo=relay.sgi.com)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <jes@sgi.com>) id 1Ki7Oa-0003fO-Q8
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 23 Sep 2008 08:53:37 -0400
Message-ID: <48D8E6CA.9040802@sgi.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2008 14:53:30 +0200
From: Jes Sorensen <jes@sgi.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [patch] move MAX_CPUS to cpu.h
References: <48D8D694.1000609@sgi.com>
	<200809231308.16398.paul@codesourcery.com>
	<yq0tzc7gj0g.fsf@jaguar.mkp.net>
	<200809231350.34178.paul@codesourcery.com>
In-Reply-To: <200809231350.34178.paul@codesourcery.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Paul Brook <paul@codesourcery.com>
Cc: Anthony Liguori <aliguori@us.ibm.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org

Paul Brook wrote:
> On Tuesday 23 September 2008, Jes Sorensen wrote:
>> Paul> Anything using the value to allocate per-cpu structures will be
>> Paul> wrong.
>>
>> What do you mean? There's plenty places where you will want to only
>> allocate enough space for the number of cpus you want to support.
> 
> Some ARM boards have 4 cpus, they just don't use the -smp option.

So what you're saying is that we need to distinguish between number of
possible CPUs and how many we allow for a given type of emulation? It
seems to me that using MAX_CPUS to be the maximum possible for an
architecture is fair and we should then maybe put it into the machine
description to set the upper limit for actual runtime ones?

Cheers,
Jes