From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:36877) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dkgyT-0001rC-3d for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 23 Aug 2017 21:30:22 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dkgyP-0003rN-Sb for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 23 Aug 2017 21:30:21 -0400 Received: from mail.cn.fujitsu.com ([183.91.158.132]:2924 helo=heian.cn.fujitsu.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dkgyP-0003qK-0w for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 23 Aug 2017 21:30:17 -0400 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> <20170823172511.GR19998@localhost.localdomain> From: Dou Liyang Message-ID: Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2017 09:30:10 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20170823172511.GR19998@localhost.localdomain> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit 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: Eduardo Habkost Cc: Igor Mammedov , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, pbonzini@redhat.com, rth@twiddle.net, mst@redhat.com Hi Eduardo, At 08/24/2017 01:25 AM, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 09:35:29PM +0800, Dou Liyang wrote: >> Hi Igor, >> >> At 08/23/2017 08:45 PM, Igor Mammedov wrote: >>> On Wed, 23 Aug 2017 20:12:51 +0800 >>> Dou Liyang wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Igor, >>>> >>>> At 08/23/2017 04:40 PM, Igor Mammedov wrote: >>>>> On Tue, 22 Aug 2017 11:24:10 +0800 >>>>> Dou Liyang wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> As QEMU supports the memory-less node, it is possible that there is >>>>>> no RAM in the first numa node(also be called as node0). eg: >>>>>> ... \ >>>>>> -m 128,slots=3,maxmem=1G \ >>>>>> -numa node -numa node,mem=128M \ >>>>>> >>>>>> But, this makes it hard for QEMU to build a known-to-work ACPI SRAT >>>>>> table. Only fixing it is not enough. >>>>>> >>>>>> Add a testcase for this situation to make sure the ACPI table is >>>>>> correct for guest. >>>>>> >>>>>> 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 >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> considering only SRAT table has been changed and the other >>>>> tables match with default blobs, I'd suggest to keep only >>>> >>>> >>>> Our testcase is： >>>> >>>> + test_acpi_one(" -m 128,slots=3,maxmem=1G" >>>> + " -numa node -numa node,mem=128" >>>> + " -numa dist,src=0,dst=1,val=21", >>>> + &data); >>>> >>>> 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. >>> >> >> OK, Got it, will drop '-numa dist' option in next version. >> >>>> >>>> So, they can't be dropped. >>> >>> I wonder what's changed, could you post DSDT diff here? >>> >> >> Just like memory hot-plug cases, when we use the '-m >> 128,slots=3,maxmem=1G' 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=3,maxmem=1G to test your > bug fix? > I was wrong, As the default memory for x86 is 128Mb, I will remove this option to make one case just do one thing. Thanks, dou.