diff mbox

[1/2] vl: Ensure the numa_post_machine_init func in the appropriate location

Message ID 1484664152-24446-2-git-send-email-douly.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com
State New
Headers show

Commit Message

Dou Liyang Jan. 17, 2017, 2:42 p.m. UTC
In the numa_post_machine_init(), we use CPU_FOREACH macro to set all
CPUs' namu_node. So, we should make sure that we call it after Qemu
has already initialied all the CPUs.

As we all know, the CPUs can be created by "-smp"(pc_new_cpu) or
"-device"(qdev_device_add) command. But, before the device init,
Qemu execute the numa_post_machine_init earlier. It makes the mapping
of NUMA nodes and CPUs incorrect.

The patch move the numa_post_machine_init func in the appropriate
location.

Signed-off-by: Dou Liyang <douly.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>
---
 vl.c | 5 +++--
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

Comments

Eduardo Habkost Jan. 17, 2017, 8:09 p.m. UTC | #1
On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 10:42:31PM +0800, Dou Liyang wrote:
> In the numa_post_machine_init(), we use CPU_FOREACH macro to set all
> CPUs' namu_node. So, we should make sure that we call it after Qemu
> has already initialied all the CPUs.
> 
> As we all know, the CPUs can be created by "-smp"(pc_new_cpu) or
> "-device"(qdev_device_add) command. But, before the device init,
> Qemu execute the numa_post_machine_init earlier. It makes the mapping
> of NUMA nodes and CPUs incorrect.
> 
> The patch move the numa_post_machine_init func in the appropriate
> location.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Dou Liyang <douly.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>

I would like to move cpu_index initialization to
qom/cpu.c:cpu_common_realizefn(), and remove
numa_post_machine_init() completely. But this fixes the bug while
we don't do that.

Reviewed-by: Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com>

Queued on numa-next. Thanks!

> ---
>  vl.c | 5 +++--
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/vl.c b/vl.c
> index c643d3f..f38b0e2 100644
> --- a/vl.c
> +++ b/vl.c
> @@ -4549,8 +4549,6 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv, char **envp)
>  
>      cpu_synchronize_all_post_init();
>  
> -    numa_post_machine_init();
> -
>      if (qemu_opts_foreach(qemu_find_opts("fw_cfg"),
>                            parse_fw_cfg, fw_cfg_find(), NULL) != 0) {
>          exit(1);
> @@ -4571,6 +4569,9 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv, char **envp)
>                            device_init_func, NULL, NULL)) {
>          exit(1);
>      }
> +
> +    numa_post_machine_init();
> +
>      rom_reset_order_override();
>  
>      /* Did we create any drives that we failed to create a device for? */
> -- 
> 2.5.5
> 
> 
>
Dou Liyang Jan. 18, 2017, 4:02 a.m. UTC | #2
Hi, Eduardo

At 01/18/2017 04:09 AM, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 10:42:31PM +0800, Dou Liyang wrote:
>> In the numa_post_machine_init(), we use CPU_FOREACH macro to set all
>> CPUs' namu_node. So, we should make sure that we call it after Qemu
>> has already initialied all the CPUs.
>>
>> As we all know, the CPUs can be created by "-smp"(pc_new_cpu) or
>> "-device"(qdev_device_add) command. But, before the device init,
>> Qemu execute the numa_post_machine_init earlier. It makes the mapping
>> of NUMA nodes and CPUs incorrect.
>>
>> The patch move the numa_post_machine_init func in the appropriate
>> location.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Dou Liyang <douly.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>
>
> I would like to move cpu_index initialization to
> qom/cpu.c:cpu_common_realizefn(), and remove
> numa_post_machine_init() completely.

Thanks, it is a good idea. I will try it later.

But, I hope to know that:

If you may want to say the cpu->**numa_node** initialization?
Because the **cpu_index** initialization is in pc_cpu_pre_plug()
currently, like that: cs->cpu_index = idx;

OR

You want to move both of them in cpu_common_realizefn() ?

Thanks,
	Liyang.

  But this fixes the bug while
> we don't do that.
>
> Reviewed-by: Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com>
>
> Queued on numa-next. Thanks!
>
>> ---
>>  vl.c | 5 +++--
>>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/vl.c b/vl.c
>> index c643d3f..f38b0e2 100644
>> --- a/vl.c
>> +++ b/vl.c
>> @@ -4549,8 +4549,6 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv, char **envp)
>>
>>      cpu_synchronize_all_post_init();
>>
>> -    numa_post_machine_init();
>> -
>>      if (qemu_opts_foreach(qemu_find_opts("fw_cfg"),
>>                            parse_fw_cfg, fw_cfg_find(), NULL) != 0) {
>>          exit(1);
>> @@ -4571,6 +4569,9 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv, char **envp)
>>                            device_init_func, NULL, NULL)) {
>>          exit(1);
>>      }
>> +
>> +    numa_post_machine_init();
>> +
>>      rom_reset_order_override();
>>
>>      /* Did we create any drives that we failed to create a device for? */
>> --
>> 2.5.5
>>
>>
>>
>
Eduardo Habkost Jan. 18, 2017, 12:45 p.m. UTC | #3
On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 12:02:35PM +0800, Dou Liyang wrote:
> Hi, Eduardo
> 
> At 01/18/2017 04:09 AM, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 10:42:31PM +0800, Dou Liyang wrote:
> > > In the numa_post_machine_init(), we use CPU_FOREACH macro to set all
> > > CPUs' namu_node. So, we should make sure that we call it after Qemu
> > > has already initialied all the CPUs.
> > > 
> > > As we all know, the CPUs can be created by "-smp"(pc_new_cpu) or
> > > "-device"(qdev_device_add) command. But, before the device init,
> > > Qemu execute the numa_post_machine_init earlier. It makes the mapping
> > > of NUMA nodes and CPUs incorrect.
> > > 
> > > The patch move the numa_post_machine_init func in the appropriate
> > > location.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Dou Liyang <douly.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>
> > 
> > I would like to move cpu_index initialization to
> > qom/cpu.c:cpu_common_realizefn(), and remove
> > numa_post_machine_init() completely.
> 
> Thanks, it is a good idea. I will try it later.
> 
> But, I hope to know that:
> 
> If you may want to say the cpu->**numa_node** initialization?
> Because the **cpu_index** initialization is in pc_cpu_pre_plug()
> currently, like that: cs->cpu_index = idx;

Oops, I meant the numa_node initialization. :)
diff mbox

Patch

diff --git a/vl.c b/vl.c
index c643d3f..f38b0e2 100644
--- a/vl.c
+++ b/vl.c
@@ -4549,8 +4549,6 @@  int main(int argc, char **argv, char **envp)
 
     cpu_synchronize_all_post_init();
 
-    numa_post_machine_init();
-
     if (qemu_opts_foreach(qemu_find_opts("fw_cfg"),
                           parse_fw_cfg, fw_cfg_find(), NULL) != 0) {
         exit(1);
@@ -4571,6 +4569,9 @@  int main(int argc, char **argv, char **envp)
                           device_init_func, NULL, NULL)) {
         exit(1);
     }
+
+    numa_post_machine_init();
+
     rom_reset_order_override();
 
     /* Did we create any drives that we failed to create a device for? */