[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] SMBIOS vs. NUMA (was: Build full type 19 tables)

From: Gabriel Somlo
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] SMBIOS vs. NUMA (was: Build full type 19 tables)
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2014 11:14:35 -0400
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)

On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 10:28:30AM +0100, Igor Mammedov wrote:
> On Thu, 13 Mar 2014 15:01:16 -0400
> "Gabriel L. Somlo" <address@hidden> wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 04:36:12PM +0100, Igor Mammedov wrote:
> > > 
> > > After memory hotplug is in I might add e820 entries after above_4g
> > > for present at boot hotpluggable DIMMDevices. They would have 1:1 mapping
> > > i.e. t19<-t20<-t17 and belong only to 1 node.
> > 
> > Any idea what the max size could be for each one of those ?
> So far there isn't anything to limit max size of a DEIMMDevice except of
> allowed max RAM size on QEMU CLI at startup time.

OK, so then it's more like:

t20 t20 ... t20
t17 t17 ... t17

since t17 is currently limited to 16G. Unless we went to smbios v2.7,
but that would require lots more external coordination (the bios still
generates the smbios entry point, where version is recorded). Right
now that's 2.4.

More questions about e820: 

1. is it safe to assume that E820_RAM (start_addr, size) entries are
non-overlapping and sorted by increasing start_addr ?

2. will there always be a below-4g entry ? if so, will it *and* the
next entry automatically be assumed to belong to the first node, and
only subsequently will there be one E820_RAM entry per node (for nodes
2, 3, etc) ? 


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]