From: Zhao Liu <zhao1.liu@intel.com>
To: "Daniel P. Berrangé" <berrange@redhat.com>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, "Thomas Huth" <thuth@redhat.com>,
devel@lists.libvirt.org,
"Philippe Mathieu-Daudé" <philmd@linaro.org>,
"Eduardo Habkost" <eduardo@habkost.net>,
"Marcel Apfelbaum" <marcel.apfelbaum@gmail.com>,
"Peter Krempa" <pkrempa@redhat.com>,
"Yanan Wang" <wangyanan55@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] hw/core: allow parameter=1 for SMP topology on any machine
Date: Thu, 16 May 2024 16:54:42 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZkXJ0r9tomQBWBqB@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240513123358.612355-2-berrange@redhat.com>
On Mon, May 13, 2024 at 01:33:57PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> Date: Mon, 13 May 2024 13:33:57 +0100
> From: "Daniel P. Berrangé" <berrange@redhat.com>
> Subject: [PATCH 1/2] hw/core: allow parameter=1 for SMP topology on any
> machine
>
> This effectively reverts
>
> commit 54c4ea8f3ae614054079395842128a856a73dbf9
> Author: Zhao Liu <zhao1.liu@intel.com>
> Date: Sat Mar 9 00:01:37 2024 +0800
>
> hw/core/machine-smp: Deprecate unsupported "parameter=1" SMP configurations
>
> but is not done as a 'git revert' since the part of the changes to the
> file hw/core/machine-smp.c which add 'has_XXX' checks remain desirable.
> Furthermore, we have to tweak the subsequently added unit test to
> account for differing warning message.
>
> The rationale for the original deprecation was:
>
> "Currently, it was allowed for users to specify the unsupported
> topology parameter as "1". For example, x86 PC machine doesn't
> support drawer/book/cluster topology levels, but user could specify
> "-smp drawers=1,books=1,clusters=1".
>
> This is meaningless and confusing, so that the support for this kind
> of configurations is marked deprecated since 9.0."
>
> There are varying POVs on the topic of 'unsupported' topology levels.
>
> It is common to say that on a system without hyperthreading, that there
> is always 1 thread. Likewise when new CPUs introduced a concept of
> multiple "dies', it was reasonable to say that all historical CPUs
> before that implicitly had 1 'die'. Likewise for the more recently
> introduced 'modules' and 'clusters' parameter'. From this POV, it is
> valid to set 'parameter=1' on the -smp command line for any machine,
> only a value > 1 is strictly an error condition.
>
> It doesn't cause any functional difficulty for QEMU, because internally
> the QEMU code is itself assuming that all "unsupported" parameters
> implicitly have a value of '1'.
>
> At the libvirt level, we've allowed applications to set 'parameter=1'
> when configuring a guest, and pass that through to QEMU.
>
> Deprecating this creates extra difficulty for because there's no info
> exposed from QEMU about which machine types "support" which parameters.
> Thus, libvirt can't know whether it is valid to pass 'parameter=1' for
> a given machine type, or whether it will trigger deprecation messages.
>
> Since there's no apparent functional benefit to deleting this deprecated
> behaviour from QEMU, and it creates problems for consumers of QEMU,
> remove this deprecation.
>
> Signed-off-by: Daniel P. Berrangé <berrange@redhat.com>
> ---
> docs/about/deprecated.rst | 14 -------
> hw/core/machine-smp.c | 82 ++++++++++++-------------------------
> tests/unit/test-smp-parse.c | 8 ++--
> 3 files changed, 30 insertions(+), 74 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/docs/about/deprecated.rst b/docs/about/deprecated.rst
> index e22acb17f2..5b551b12a6 100644
> --- a/docs/about/deprecated.rst
> +++ b/docs/about/deprecated.rst
> @@ -47,20 +47,6 @@ as short-form boolean values, and passed to plugins as ``arg_name=on``.
> However, short-form booleans are deprecated and full explicit ``arg_name=on``
> form is preferred.
>
> -``-smp`` (Unsupported "parameter=1" SMP configurations) (since 9.0)
> -'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''
> -
> -Specified CPU topology parameters must be supported by the machine.
> -
> -In the SMP configuration, users should provide the CPU topology parameters that
> -are supported by the target machine.
> -
> -However, historically it was allowed for users to specify the unsupported
> -topology parameter as "1", which is meaningless. So support for this kind of
> -configurations (e.g. -smp drawers=1,books=1,clusters=1 for x86 PC machine) is
> -marked deprecated since 9.0, users have to ensure that all the topology members
> -described with -smp are supported by the target machine.
> -
> User-mode emulator command line arguments
> -----------------------------------------
>
> diff --git a/hw/core/machine-smp.c b/hw/core/machine-smp.c
> index 2b93fa99c9..eb43caca9b 100644
> --- a/hw/core/machine-smp.c
> +++ b/hw/core/machine-smp.c
> @@ -119,75 +119,45 @@ void machine_parse_smp_config(MachineState *ms,
>
> /*
> * If not supported by the machine, a topology parameter must be
Also need to change this line as:
s/must be/must/
> - * omitted.
> + * not be set to a value greater than 1.
> */
Only the above nit,
Reviewed-by: Zhao Liu <zhao1.liu@intel.com>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-05-16 8:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-05-13 12:33 [PATCH 0/2] hw/core: revert deprecation of 'parameter=1' for SMP topology Daniel P. Berrangé
2024-05-13 12:33 ` [PATCH 1/2] hw/core: allow parameter=1 for SMP topology on any machine Daniel P. Berrangé
2024-05-13 14:22 ` Zhao Liu
2024-05-13 14:39 ` Daniel P. Berrangé
2024-05-14 3:49 ` Zhao Liu
2024-05-15 17:06 ` Daniel P. Berrangé
2024-05-16 8:47 ` Zhao Liu
2024-05-16 8:54 ` Zhao Liu [this message]
2024-05-13 12:33 ` [PATCH 2/2] tests: add testing of parameter=1 for SMP topology Daniel P. Berrangé
2024-05-16 2:57 ` Xiaoyao Li
2024-05-16 8:59 ` Zhao Liu
2024-05-13 13:53 ` [PATCH 0/2] hw/core: revert deprecation of 'parameter=1' " Ján Tomko
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=ZkXJ0r9tomQBWBqB@intel.com \
--to=zhao1.liu@intel.com \
--cc=berrange@redhat.com \
--cc=devel@lists.libvirt.org \
--cc=eduardo@habkost.net \
--cc=marcel.apfelbaum@gmail.com \
--cc=philmd@linaro.org \
--cc=pkrempa@redhat.com \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=thuth@redhat.com \
--cc=wangyanan55@huawei.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).