On 16.06.2014 [18:16:29 +1000], Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote: > On 06/16/2014 05:53 PM, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote: > > c4177479 "spapr: make sure RMA is in first mode of first memory node" > > introduced regression which prevents from running guests with memoryless > > NUMA node#0 which may happen on real POWER8 boxes and which would make > > sense to debug in QEMU. > > > > This patchset aim is to fix that and also fix various code problems in > > memory nodes generation. > > > > These 2 patches could be merged (the resulting patch looks rather ugly): > > spapr: Use DT memory node rendering helper for other nodes > > spapr: Move DT memory node rendering to a helper > > > > Please comment. Thanks! > > > > Sure I forgot to add an example of what I am trying to run without errors > and warnings:
<snip> > -numa node,nodeid=0,cpus=0-7,memory=0 \ > -numa node,nodeid=2,cpus=0-3,mem=1040 \ > -numa node,nodeid=4,cpus=4-7,mem=1040 Semantically, what does this mean? CPUs 0-3 are on both node 0 and node 2? I didn't think the NUMA spec allowed that? Or does qemu's command-line take the "last" specified assignment of a CPU to a nodeid? Perhaps unrelated to your changes, but I think it would be most sensible here to error out if a CPU is assigned to multiple NUMA nodes. <snip> > [root@localhost ~]# numactl --hardware > > available: 3 nodes (0,2,4) > node 0 cpus: > node 0 size: 0 MB > node 0 free: 0 MB > node 2 cpus: 0 1 2 3 > node 2 size: 1021 MB > node 2 free: 610 MB > node 4 cpus: 4 5 6 7 > node 4 size: 1038 MB > node 4 free: 881 MB > node distances: > node 0 2 4 > 0: 10 40 40 > 2: 40 10 40 > 4: 40 40 10 > > > Seems correct except that weird node#0 which comes I do not where from. Well, Linux has a statically online Node 0, which if no CPUs or memory are assigned to it, will show up as above as a cpuless and memoryless node. That's not a bug in qemu, and is something I'm looking into upstream in the kernel. > And the patchset is made agains agraf/ppc-next tree.