[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH v20 01/21] s390x/cpu topology: add s390 specifics to CPU topo
From: |
Thomas Huth |
Subject: |
Re: [PATCH v20 01/21] s390x/cpu topology: add s390 specifics to CPU topology |
Date: |
Thu, 27 Apr 2023 10:04:13 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.9.0 |
On 25/04/2023 18.14, Pierre Morel wrote:
S390 adds two new SMP levels, drawers and books to the CPU
topology.
The S390 CPU have specific topology features like dedication
and entitlement to give to the guest indications on the host
vCPUs scheduling and help the guest take the best decisions
on the scheduling of threads on the vCPUs.
Let us provide the SMP properties with books and drawers levels
and S390 CPU with dedication and entitlement,
Signed-off-by: Pierre Morel <pmorel@linux.ibm.com>
---
...> diff --git a/qapi/machine-target.json b/qapi/machine-target.json
index 2e267fa458..42a6a40333 100644
--- a/qapi/machine-target.json
+++ b/qapi/machine-target.json
@@ -342,3 +342,15 @@
'TARGET_S390X',
'TARGET_MIPS',
'TARGET_LOONGARCH64' ] } }
+
+##
+# @CpuS390Polarization:
+#
+# An enumeration of cpu polarization that can be assumed by a virtual
+# S390 CPU
+#
+# Since: 8.1
+##
+{ 'enum': 'CpuS390Polarization',
+ 'prefix': 'S390_CPU_POLARIZATION',
+ 'data': [ 'horizontal', 'vertical' ] }
It seems like you don't need this here yet ... I think you likely could also
introduce it in a later patch instead (patch 11 seems the first one that
needs this?)
Also, would a " 'if': 'TARGET_S390X' " be possible here, too?
diff --git a/hw/core/machine-smp.c b/hw/core/machine-smp.c
index c3dab007da..77bee06304 100644
--- a/hw/core/machine-smp.c
+++ b/hw/core/machine-smp.c
@@ -30,8 +30,19 @@ static char *cpu_hierarchy_to_string(MachineState *ms)
{
MachineClass *mc = MACHINE_GET_CLASS(ms);
GString *s = g_string_new(NULL);
+ const char *multiply = " * ", *prefix = "";
- g_string_append_printf(s, "sockets (%u)", ms->smp.sockets);
+ if (mc->smp_props.drawers_supported) {
+ g_string_append_printf(s, "drawers (%u)", ms->smp.drawers);
+ prefix = multiply;
That "prefix" stuff looks complicated ... why don't you simply add the "*"
at the end of the strings:
g_string_append_printf(s, "drawers (%u) * ",
ms->smp.drawers);
?
+ }
+
+ if (mc->smp_props.books_supported) {
+ g_string_append_printf(s, "%sbooks (%u)", prefix, ms->smp.books);
+ prefix = multiply;
+ }
+
+ g_string_append_printf(s, "%ssockets (%u)", prefix, ms->smp.sockets);
... it's followed by "sockets" here anyway, so adding the " * " at the end
of the strings above should be fine.
{
MachineClass *mc = MACHINE_GET_CLASS(ms);
unsigned cpus = config->has_cpus ? config->cpus : 0;
+ unsigned drawers = config->has_drawers ? config->drawers : 0;
+ unsigned books = config->has_books ? config->books : 0;
unsigned sockets = config->has_sockets ? config->sockets : 0;
unsigned dies = config->has_dies ? config->dies : 0;
unsigned clusters = config->has_clusters ? config->clusters : 0;
@@ -85,6 +98,8 @@ void machine_parse_smp_config(MachineState *ms,
* explicit configuration like "cpus=0" is not allowed.
*/
if ((config->has_cpus && config->cpus == 0) ||
+ (config->has_drawers && config->drawers == 0) ||
+ (config->has_books && config->books == 0) ||
(config->has_sockets && config->sockets == 0) ||
(config->has_dies && config->dies == 0) ||
(config->has_clusters && config->clusters == 0) ||
@@ -111,6 +126,19 @@ void machine_parse_smp_config(MachineState *ms,
dies = dies > 0 ? dies : 1;
clusters = clusters > 0 ? clusters : 1;
+ if (!mc->smp_props.books_supported && books > 1) {
+ error_setg(errp, "books not supported by this machine's CPU topology");
+ return;
+ }
+ books = books > 0 ? books : 1;
Could be shortened to: book = books ?: 1;
+ if (!mc->smp_props.drawers_supported && drawers > 1) {
+ error_setg(errp,
+ "drawers not supported by this machine's CPU topology");
+ return;
+ }
+ drawers = drawers > 0 ? drawers : 1;
Could be shortened to: drawers = drawers ?: 1;
/* compute missing values based on the provided ones */
if (cpus == 0 && maxcpus == 0) {
sockets = sockets > 0 ? sockets : 1;
@@ -124,33 +152,41 @@ void machine_parse_smp_config(MachineState *ms,
if (sockets == 0) {
cores = cores > 0 ? cores : 1;
threads = threads > 0 ? threads : 1;
- sockets = maxcpus / (dies * clusters * cores * threads);
+ sockets = maxcpus /
+ (drawers * books * dies * clusters * cores *
threads);
} else if (cores == 0) {
threads = threads > 0 ? threads : 1;
- cores = maxcpus / (sockets * dies * clusters * threads);
+ cores = maxcpus /
+ (drawers * books * sockets * dies * clusters *
threads);
}
(not very important, but I wonder whether we should maybe disallow
"prefer_sockets" with drawers and books instead of updating the calculation
here - since prefer_sockets should only occur on old machine types)
} else {
/* prefer cores over sockets since 6.2 */
if (cores == 0) {
sockets = sockets > 0 ? sockets : 1;
threads = threads > 0 ? threads : 1;
- cores = maxcpus / (sockets * dies * clusters * threads);
+ cores = maxcpus /
+ (drawers * books * sockets * dies * clusters *
threads);
} else if (sockets == 0) {
threads = threads > 0 ? threads : 1;
- sockets = maxcpus / (dies * clusters * cores * threads);
+ sockets = maxcpus /
+ (drawers * books * dies * clusters * cores *
threads);
}
}
Thomas
- Re: [PATCH v20 03/21] target/s390x/cpu topology: handle STSI(15) and build the SYSIB, (continued)
- [PATCH v20 21/21] tests/avocado: s390x cpu topology query-cpu-polarization, Pierre Morel, 2023/04/25
- [PATCH v20 16/21] tests/avocado: s390x cpu topology entitlement tests, Pierre Morel, 2023/04/25
- [PATCH v20 09/21] machine: adding s390 topology to query-cpu-fast, Pierre Morel, 2023/04/25
- [PATCH v20 20/21] tests/avocado: s390x cpu topology bad move, Pierre Morel, 2023/04/25
- [PATCH v20 05/21] s390x/cpu topology: resetting the Topology-Change-Report, Pierre Morel, 2023/04/25
- [PATCH v20 04/21] s390x/sclp: reporting the maximum nested topology entries, Pierre Morel, 2023/04/25
- [PATCH v20 10/21] machine: adding s390 topology to info hotpluggable-cpus, Pierre Morel, 2023/04/25
- [PATCH v20 01/21] s390x/cpu topology: add s390 specifics to CPU topology, Pierre Morel, 2023/04/25
- Re: [PATCH v20 01/21] s390x/cpu topology: add s390 specifics to CPU topology,
Thomas Huth <=
- [PATCH v20 11/21] qapi/s390x/cpu topology: CPU_POLARIZATION_CHANGE qapi event, Pierre Morel, 2023/04/25
- [PATCH v20 19/21] tests/avocado: s390x cpu topology dedicated errors, Pierre Morel, 2023/04/25
- [PATCH v20 18/21] tests/avocado: s390x cpu topology test socket full, Pierre Morel, 2023/04/25
- [PATCH v20 14/21] tests/avocado: s390x cpu topology core, Pierre Morel, 2023/04/25
- [PATCH v20 15/21] tests/avocado: s390x cpu topology polarisation, Pierre Morel, 2023/04/25
- [PATCH v20 08/21] qapi/s390x/cpu topology: set-cpu-topology qmp command, Pierre Morel, 2023/04/25