[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [PATCH 2/2] qemu-options: Add missing "sockets=2" to CLI "-smp 2"

From: wangyanan (Y)
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] qemu-options: Add missing "sockets=2" to CLI "-smp 2"
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2021 19:42:24 +0800
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.4.0

On 2021/9/28 19:01, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
On Tue, Sep 28, 2021 at 06:58:20PM +0800, wangyanan (Y) wrote:
On 2021/9/28 18:46, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
On 9/28/21 11:31, Yanan Wang wrote:
There is one example of -smp CLI in qemu-options.hx currently
using "-smp 2" and assuming that there will be 2 sockets.
However now the actually calculation logic of missing sockets
and cores is not immutable, we should use more explicit CLIs
like "-smp 2,sockets=2" if we want multiple sockets.

Signed-off-by: Yanan Wang <wangyanan55@huawei.com>
   qemu-options.hx | 2 +-
   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/qemu-options.hx b/qemu-options.hx
index dcd9595650..ff8917c5e1 100644
--- a/qemu-options.hx
+++ b/qemu-options.hx
@@ -395,7 +395,7 @@ SRST
           -m 2G \
           -object memory-backend-ram,size=1G,id=m0 \
           -object memory-backend-ram,size=1G,id=m1 \
-        -smp 2 \
+        -smp 2,sockets=2,maxcpus=2 \
Is the addition of "maxcpus=2" intentional?
Yes, but it's not necessary IMO. I just wanted to keep consistency
with other numa config examples in the Doc. Should I remove it ?
I think it makes sense to be explicit, because the numa config
works in terms of maxcpus when splitting cpus between nodes
The statement of this numa config example actually assume that
there will be 2 cpus totally. Although based on behavior of the
smp parser we will get maxcpus=2, I also tend to keep it explicitly.

But I should update subject of this patch and the commit message.


reply via email to

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