Btw,
while I got your attention, on a not-really related topic: how do we
feel about adding support for specifying a non-contiguous set of cpus
for a numa node in qemu with the -numa option? I.e., like this, for
example:
x86_64-softmmu/qemu-system-x86_64 -smp 8 -numa node,nodeid=0,cpus=0\;2\;4-5 -numa node,nodeid=1,cpus=1\;3\;6-7
The ';' needs to be escaped from the shell but I'm open for better
suggestions.
Here's a diff:
---
diff --git a/vl.c b/vl.c
index 4e709d5c1c20..82a6c8451fb0 100644
--- a/vl.c
+++ b/vl.c
@@ -1261,9 +1261,27 @@ char *get_boot_devices_list(size_t *size)
return list;
}
+static int __numa_set_cpus(unsigned long *map, int start, int end)
+{
+ if (end >= MAX_CPUMASK_BITS) {
+ end = MAX_CPUMASK_BITS - 1;
+ fprintf(stderr,
+ "qemu: NUMA: A max of %d VCPUs are supported\n",
+ MAX_CPUMASK_BITS);
+ return -EINVAL;
+ }
+
+ if (end < start) {
+ return -EINVAL;
+ }
+
+ bitmap_set(map, start, end-start+1);
+ return 0;
+}
+
static void numa_node_parse_cpus(int nodenr, const char *cpus)
{
- char *endptr;
+ char *endptr, *ptr = (char *)cpus;
unsigned long long value, endvalue;
/* Empty CPU range strings will be considered valid, they will simply
@@ -1273,7 +1291,8 @@ static void numa_node_parse_cpus(int nodenr, const char *cpus)
return;
}
- if (parse_uint(cpus, &value, &endptr, 10) < 0) {
+fromthetop:
+ if (parse_uint(ptr, &value, &endptr, 10) < 0) {
goto error;
}
if (*endptr == '-') {
@@ -1282,22 +1301,22 @@ static void numa_node_parse_cpus(int nodenr, const char *cpus)
}
} else if (*endptr == '\0') {
endvalue = value;
- } else {
- goto error;
- }
+ } else if (*endptr == ';') {
+ if (__numa_set_cpus(node_cpumask[nodenr], value, value) < 0) {
+ goto error;
+ }
+ endptr++;
+ if (*endptr == '\0')
+ return;
- if (endvalue >= MAX_CPUMASK_BITS) {
- endvalue = MAX_CPUMASK_BITS - 1;
- fprintf(stderr,
- "qemu: NUMA: A max of %d VCPUs are supported\n",
- MAX_CPUMASK_BITS);
- }
+ ptr = endptr;
- if (endvalue < value) {
+ goto fromthetop;
+ } else {
goto error;
}
- bitmap_set(node_cpumask[nodenr], value, endvalue-value+1);
+ __numa_set_cpus(node_cpumask[nodenr], value, endvalue);
return;
error:
--
Thanks.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
Sent from a fat crate under my desk. Formatting is fine.
--
On Sun, Sep 29, 2013 at 05:10:44PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> Btw,
>
> while I got your attention, on a not-really related topic: how do we
> feel about adding support for specifying a non-contiguous set of cpus
> for a numa node in qemu with the -numa option? I.e., like this, for
> example:
>
> x86_64-softmmu/qemu-system-x86_64 -smp 8 -numa node,nodeid=0,cpus=0\;2\;4-5 -numa node,nodeid=1,cpus=1\;3\;6-7
>
> The ';' needs to be escaped from the shell but I'm open for better
> suggestions.
Use a ':' instead.
Daniel
--
|: http://berrange.com -o- http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :|
|: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org :|
|: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :|
|: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :|
Il 29/09/2013 17:10, Borislav Petkov ha scritto:
> Btw,
>
> while I got your attention, on a not-really related topic: how do we
> feel about adding support for specifying a non-contiguous set of cpus
> for a numa node in qemu with the -numa option? I.e., like this, for
> example:
>
> x86_64-softmmu/qemu-system-x86_64 -smp 8 -numa node,nodeid=0,cpus=0\;2\;4-5 -numa node,nodeid=1,cpus=1\;3\;6-7
I think there are already patches on the list to do that, as part of the
NUMA memory binding series from Wanlong Gao.
Paolo
> The ';' needs to be escaped from the shell but I'm open for better
> suggestions.
>
> Here's a diff:
>
> ---
> diff --git a/vl.c b/vl.c
> index 4e709d5c1c20..82a6c8451fb0 100644
> --- a/vl.c
> +++ b/vl.c
> @@ -1261,9 +1261,27 @@ char *get_boot_devices_list(size_t *size)
> return list;
> }
>
> +static int __numa_set_cpus(unsigned long *map, int start, int end)
> +{
> + if (end >= MAX_CPUMASK_BITS) {
> + end = MAX_CPUMASK_BITS - 1;
> + fprintf(stderr,
> + "qemu: NUMA: A max of %d VCPUs are supported\n",
> + MAX_CPUMASK_BITS);
> + return -EINVAL;
> + }
> +
> + if (end < start) {
> + return -EINVAL;
> + }
> +
> + bitmap_set(map, start, end-start+1);
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> static void numa_node_parse_cpus(int nodenr, const char *cpus)
> {
> - char *endptr;
> + char *endptr, *ptr = (char *)cpus;
> unsigned long long value, endvalue;
>
> /* Empty CPU range strings will be considered valid, they will simply
> @@ -1273,7 +1291,8 @@ static void numa_node_parse_cpus(int nodenr, const char *cpus)
> return;
> }
>
> - if (parse_uint(cpus, &value, &endptr, 10) < 0) {
> +fromthetop:
> + if (parse_uint(ptr, &value, &endptr, 10) < 0) {
> goto error;
> }
> if (*endptr == '-') {
> @@ -1282,22 +1301,22 @@ static void numa_node_parse_cpus(int nodenr, const char *cpus)
> }
> } else if (*endptr == '\0') {
> endvalue = value;
> - } else {
> - goto error;
> - }
> + } else if (*endptr == ';') {
> + if (__numa_set_cpus(node_cpumask[nodenr], value, value) < 0) {
> + goto error;
> + }
> + endptr++;
> + if (*endptr == '\0')
> + return;
>
> - if (endvalue >= MAX_CPUMASK_BITS) {
> - endvalue = MAX_CPUMASK_BITS - 1;
> - fprintf(stderr,
> - "qemu: NUMA: A max of %d VCPUs are supported\n",
> - MAX_CPUMASK_BITS);
> - }
> + ptr = endptr;
>
> - if (endvalue < value) {
> + goto fromthetop;
> + } else {
> goto error;
> }
>
> - bitmap_set(node_cpumask[nodenr], value, endvalue-value+1);
> + __numa_set_cpus(node_cpumask[nodenr], value, endvalue);
> return;
>
> error:
> --
>
> Thanks.
>
On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 11:05:10AM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> I think there are already patches on the list to do that, as part of
> the NUMA memory binding series from Wanlong Gao.
Yeah: https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2013-09/msg02833.html
Although I don't see from it how the syntax for -cpus will look like
from that QAPI magic except that it is an
+ '*cpus': ['uint16'],
:-)
Thanks.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
Sent from a fat crate under my desk. Formatting is fine.
--
Il 30/09/2013 11:49, Borislav Petkov ha scritto:
> Yeah: https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2013-09/msg02833.html
>
> Although I don't see from it how the syntax for -cpus will look like
> from that QAPI magic except that it is an
>
> + '*cpus': ['uint16'],
It's "-numa node,cpus=0-1,cpus=4-5".
Paolo