On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 10:17:49AM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>
>
> On 13/06/2016 22:35, Andrew Jones wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 07:04:01PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> >> On 10/06/2016 19:40, Andrew Jones wrote:
> >>> + if (sockets == -1 || cores == -1 || threads == -1 ||
> >>> + maxcpus == -1 || cpus == -1) {
> >>> + error_report("cpu topology: "
> >>> + "all machine properties must be specified");
> >>> + exit(1);
> >>> + }
> >>> +
> >>
> >> I think it's sane to accept some defaults. It must not be the DWIM
> >> thing that -smp does (which is targeted to Windows's dislike of
> >> multi-socket machine on consumer hardware). It must be something that
> >> makes sense, and my proposal is:
> >>
> >> - threads: 1
> >> - cores: 1
> >> - sockets:
> >> - maxcpus / (cores * threads) if maxcpus given
> >> - cpus / (cores * threads) if cpus given
> >> - else 1
> >> - maxcpus: cores * threads * sockets
> >> - cpus: maxcpus
> >
> > I think some machines may prefer
> >
> > - threads: 1
> > - sockets: 1
> > - cores:
> > - maxcpus / (sockets * threads) if maxcpus given
> > - cpus / (sockets * threads) if cpus given
> > - else 1
>
> smp_cores is only used by pseries and x86 machines. I expect machines
> that must be single-socket to disregard smp_sockets altogether.
Note that on pseries (as a purely paravirt platform), the distinction
between cores and sockets is basically meaningless - there is no
important difference between a threads=4,cores=4,sockets=1 machine and
a threads=4,cores=1,sockets=4 machine.s
--
David Gibson | I'll have my music baroque, and my code
david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au | minimalist, thank you. NOT _the_ _other_
| _way_ _around_!
http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
