On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 09:35:29PM +0800, Dou Liyang wrote:
> Hi Igor,
>
> At 08/23/2017 08:45 PM, Igor Mammedov wrote:
> > On Wed, 23 Aug 2017 20:12:51 +0800
> > Dou Liyang <douly.f...@cn.fujitsu.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Igor,
> > >
> > > At 08/23/2017 04:40 PM, Igor Mammedov wrote:
> > > > On Tue, 22 Aug 2017 11:24:10 +0800
> > > > Dou Liyang <douly.f...@cn.fujitsu.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > As QEMU supports the memory-less node, it is possible that there is
> > > > > no RAM in the first numa node(also be called as node0). eg:
> > > > > ... \
> > > > > -m 128,slots=3,maxmem=1G \
> > > > > -numa node -numa node,mem=128M \
> > > > >
> > > > > But, this makes it hard for QEMU to build a known-to-work ACPI SRAT
> > > > > table. Only fixing it is not enough.
> > > > >
> > > > > Add a testcase for this situation to make sure the ACPI table is
> > > > > correct for guest.
> > > > >
> > > > > Suggested-by: Eduardo Habkost <ehabk...@redhat.com>
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Dou Liyang <douly.f...@cn.fujitsu.com>
> > > > > ---
> > > > > tests/acpi-test-data/pc/DSDT.numamem | Bin 0 -> 6463 bytes
> > > > > tests/acpi-test-data/pc/SLIT.numamem | Bin 0 -> 48 bytes
> > > > > tests/acpi-test-data/pc/SRAT.numamem | Bin 0 -> 264 bytes
> > > > > tests/acpi-test-data/q35/DSDT.numamem | Bin 0 -> 9147 bytes
> > > > > tests/acpi-test-data/q35/SLIT.numamem | Bin 0 -> 48 bytes
> > > > > tests/acpi-test-data/q35/SRAT.numamem | Bin 0 -> 264 bytes
> > > > > tests/bios-tables-test.c | 30
> > > > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > > > 7 files changed, 30 insertions(+)
> > > > > create mode 100644 tests/acpi-test-data/pc/DSDT.numamem
> > > > > create mode 100644 tests/acpi-test-data/pc/SLIT.numamem
> > > > > create mode 100644 tests/acpi-test-data/pc/SRAT.numamem
> > > > > create mode 100644 tests/acpi-test-data/q35/DSDT.numamem
> > > > > create mode 100644 tests/acpi-test-data/q35/SLIT.numamem
> > > > > create mode 100644 tests/acpi-test-data/q35/SRAT.numamem
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > considering only SRAT table has been changed and the other
> > > > tables match with default blobs, I'd suggest to keep only
> > >
> > >
> > > Our testcase is：
> > >
> > > + test_acpi_one(" -m 128,slots=3,maxmem=1G"
> > > + " -numa node -numa node,mem=128"
> > > + " -numa dist,src=0,dst=1,val=21",
> > > + &data);
> > >
> > > The DSDT and SLIT don't match with default blobs.
> > do you actually need SLIT table /i.e. -numa dist/ for test at all?
> > it looks not relevant for the test case at the hand,
> > I'd suggest to drop '-numa dist' option for the test.
> >
>
> OK, Got it, will drop '-numa dist' option in next version.
>
> > >
> > > So, they can't be dropped.
> >
> > I wonder what's changed, could you post DSDT diff here?
> >
>
> Just like memory hot-plug cases, when we use the '-m
> 128,slots=3,maxmem=1G' option, As the ACPI spec said, There may be some
> Memory Device in the DSDT table.
Do you really need to use -m 128,slots=3,maxmem=1G to test your
bug fix?
--
Eduardo
