From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1MNT3j-0004u6-A5
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 05 Jul 2009 10:51:15 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1MNT3e-0004rP-Hf
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 05 Jul 2009 10:51:14 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=45519 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MNT3e-0004rD-Bf
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 05 Jul 2009 10:51:10 -0400
Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:48566)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <avi@redhat.com>) id 1MNT3d-0007kL-Sq
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 05 Jul 2009 10:51:10 -0400
Message-ID: <4A50BE5D.5010005@redhat.com>
Date: Sun, 05 Jul 2009 17:53:17 +0300
From: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1246632116-31366-1-git-send-email-andre.przywara@amd.com>
	<4A4F745C.8010001@redhat.com>
	<DB13E24C-654D-4752-884E-D951A42D4CB5@suse.de>
In-Reply-To: <DB13E24C-654D-4752-884E-D951A42D4CB5@suse.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: [Qemu-devel] Re: [RFC] allow multi-core guests: introduce cores=
	option to -cpu
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: Alexander Graf <agraf@suse.de>
Cc: Andre Przywara <andre.przywara@amd.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org

On 07/05/2009 04:23 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>> I thought of using -smp [processors=]2,cores=4,threads=2 (for a total 
>> of 16 threads), but I think it makes more sense with -cpu.
>
>
> I actually think putting this in -smp makes more sense. -cpu really 
> shouldn't need to be touched by normal users and as long as you can 
> either -cpu host or -cpu safe that should be enough.

Maybe.  But in that case -cpu core2duo should imply cores=2 and -smp 2 
-cpu core2duo will bring up 4 cores spread across two sockets.

> But then again maybe we should replace -smp with something more useful 
> like -numa where you'd then specify #CPUs, #cores, mem-cpu connection, 
> etc.

I'd prefer -numa to specify the memory topology (and connections of 
sockets to memory nodes), and -smp or -cpu to specify the intra-socket 
topology.

-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function